Knowledge Economy

Mark Todd: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what steps he has taken to implement the recommendation of the Cross-cutting review of the Knowledge Economy that research be undertaken on the economies of pricing of Government information.

Stephen Timms: Many of the recommendations of the Review have been implemented. HM Stationery Office (now the Office of Public Sector Information) introduced an innovative Click-Use on-line Class Licence for easy application for a licence to re-use information covered by Crown copyright. In 2001, the Treasury issued guidance to Government Departments and other Crown bodies on charging for government information.
	The Freedom of Information Act provided significant access to information while the Government's Wider Markets Initiative and the implementation of the Re-use of Public Sector Information Directive into UK law further opened up public sector information to commercial re-use.
	Given the degree of development in the public sector information market since the Cross-cutting review, the Government have no plans to undertake research into the economies of pricing of government information at this stage.

Manufacturing

Philip Hollobone: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer pursuant to the answer of 25 January 2007,  Official Report, column 1982W, on manufacturing, if he will clarify which part of the information provided indicates how many jobs there were in manufacturing in  (a) 1997 and  (b) 2006.

John Healey: The UK economy is restructuring away from manufacturing towards services, like other advanced economies around the world. According to the ONS Labour Force Survey, manufacturing jobs have fallen from 4.51 million in 1997 to 3.32 million jobs now, this has been balanced by a growth of 3.77 million jobs in other sectors.

Smith Institute

Mark Francois: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what the  (a) date and  (b) amount was of each payment made to (i) the Smith Institute and (ii) its subsidiary SI Events Ltd. by his Department in each of the last three years.

John Healey: Neither organisation has ever received any direct payments from the Treasury.
	Every external organisation who uses No. 11 does so on the same basis: the organisers of events at No. 11 meet all additional costs associated with holding the event. This is to ensure no public funds are used for events held by external organisations.
	However, we have established that the independent, Government-funded Myners review of the "Governance of Life Mutuals" commissioned a number of research and other organisations including SI Events Ltd., who in November 2004 organised two seminars to inform the work of the review, neither in No.11 Downing street. The Treasury have asked Mr. Myners to provide details of these seminars, including their cost. He has written today to the Permanent Secretary and I have placed a copy of his letter in the Library of the House.

Tax: Electronic Submissions

Vincent Cable: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what factors led to the increased expenditure in incentive payments for electronic filing from the initial estimate for 2004-05; and if he will make a statement.

Dawn Primarolo: The actual expenditure for 2004-05 filings was higher than the initial estimate for online filing incentives because substantially more small employers than anticipated filed online.
	The assumption was that online filing take-up by small employers (fewer than 50 employees) for 2004-05 would be 10 per cent., which equates to a costs of £37 million. These figures reflected the hesitation and reluctance expressed by small employers over the introduction of electronic filing. In fact, 51 per cent. of small employers filed online for 2004-05 at a cost of £225 million.

Climate Change

Mark Simmonds: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development 
	(1)  what funding his Department has provided for research into identifying and adapting to the impact of climate change in each financial year since 2001-02; and to which organisations such funding was provided in each year;
	(2)  what funding his Department has allocated in each of the next three financial years for research into identifying and adapting to the impact of climate change; and to which organisations such funding has been allocated.

Gareth Thomas: DFID did not provide funding for climate change research prior to 2006-07.
	DFID has entered into an arrangement with Canada's International Development Research Centre (IDRC) to provide funding for research into how poverty stricken people can best adapt to climate change. IDRC have overall management of the programme which is giving research grants to African organisations and their partners. The programme went live in May 2006.
	DFID is providing £24 million to the programme over the five financial years 2006-07 to 2010-11. IDRC are providing C$15 million over the same period. DFID will provide £4 million in 2006-07 and £5 million in each of the four subsequent financial years.
	In line with the third White Paper commitments, we will be significantly increasing climate change research in addition to the aforementioned funding described. Consultation is being conducted at the moment as to further research programmes.

Democratic Republic of the Congo

David Drew: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development what steps he is taking to encourage transparency over mining activities in the Democratic Republic of the Congo.

Hilary Benn: DFID is encouraging transparency in mining activities in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) through the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI). Support to this way of improving revenue transparency is a major part DFID's planned support in the minerals sector in DRC. The Government of DRC signed up to the EITI in March 2005. Since then important progress has been made in implementing EITI. A multi-stakeholder national EITI Committee was established by Presidential Decree in November 2005 charged with ensuring the DRC implementation process complies with EITI criteria. In February 2006, the DRC Government named members of the EITI Committee and allocated a budget for its operations from the Government's finances. In addition, an EITI baseline study for the exploitation of copper, cobalt and diamonds is currently under way.
	However, a lot more work will be needed before EITI is fully implemented in the DRC. Continued political commitment from the newly-elected DRC Government as well as capacity building and improved co-ordination within relevant DRC Government institutions will be crucial. Strong engagement from civil society, the private sector and wider international community stakeholders will also be required. When the new Government is in place, we will press them to take early action to improve transparency in natural resource management.
	DFID is also developing plans for public-private partnerships with a select group of international mining companies to support local development priorities in mining areas and to encourage responsible business behaviour.

Committees: Ministerial Attendance

Ben Wallace: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport on what occasions  (a) she and  (b) departmental Ministers have been requested to appear before committees of (i) devolved institutions and (ii) the European Parliament since 2004; on what topic in each case; how many and what proportion of such requests were accepted; and if she will make a statement.

David Lammy: All the information requested is not readily available and could be provided at only disproportionate cost. However, a DCMS Minister was invited to appear before the European Parliamentary Committee on Culture and Education on 12 July 2005 to set out the UK Presidency agenda in the field of culture. I attended the meeting on 12 July 2006 as Minister for Culture.

Departmental Offices

Vincent Cable: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government what area of office space her Department and its agencies used in central London in  (a) 2004 and  (b) 2006; and if she will make a statement.

Angela Smith: The area of office space used by Communities and Local Government in central London in 2004 and 2006 is as follows:
	
		
			  Sq m 
			   2004  2006 
			   Floor space in buildings occupied in whole  Floor space in buildings occupied in part  Floor space in buildings occupied in whole  Floor space in buildings occupied in part 
			  Freehold property 
			 26 Whitehall — 5,045 — 5,045 
			 Total 5,045 5,045 
			
			  Leasehold property 
			 Eland House 22,650 — 22,650 — 
			 Ashdown House — 6,727 — 6,727 
			 Portland House 2,163 — — — 
			 Exchange Tower 710 — 710 — 
			 Allington Towers — — — 1,911 
			 Sub total 25,523 6,727 23,360 8,638 
			 Total 32,250 31,998 
		
	
	The Department's occupation of 26 Whitehall ceased at the end of October 2006 apart from the Equalities Review Team, a body sponsored by Communities and Local Government, which remained in 26 Whitehall but the occupation is not expected to continue after the end of this financial year. Communities and Local Government is not being charged for the space occupied. In place of 26 Whitehall the Department took 1,981 sq m on two floors in Stockley House from the beginning of November. These are unoccupied but will be occupied temporarily in 2007 as decant space to enable the reorganisation of Eland House to full open plan standard. The move to open plan in Eland House is part of the Department's plan to rationalise its central London buildings by March 2008.
	These figures do not include Government Office for London which performs functions on behalf of 10 Government Department. The only Agency in central London is the Queen Elizabeth II Conference Centre which has not been included in the answer as it does not function as an office.

Fire Service

Andrew Dismore: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government how many firefighters died on duty in each of the last 10 years for which figures are available, broken down by fire authority.

Angela Smith: Details of firefighter deaths while on operational duty (attending fires and other incidents) are as follows:
	
		
			  Firefighter deaths while on operational duty: England 1997-2006 
			   Number  Fire and Rescue Service 
			 1997 0 None 
			 1998 0 None 
			 1999 1 Greater Manchester 
			 2000 1 Hampshire 
			 2001 0 None 
			 2002 1 Leicestershire 
			 2003 1 Greater Manchester 
			 2004 2 London 
			 2005 2 Hertfordshire 
			 2006 2 East Sussex 
			  Source:  Fire and Rescue Service returns to Communities and Local Government

Parliamentary Questions

Eric Pickles: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government whether officials in her Department have discussed with other departments co-ordinating responses to round robin written Parliamentary questions in the last 12 months.

Angela Smith: The Government made clear in their response to the Third Report of Session 2003-04 from the Public Administration Select Committee, that while Government Departments may liaise with each other when they receive the same question, this co-ordination
	"does not cut across the line of ministerial accountability which is that it is for individual Ministers to decide on the final content of an answer to a Parliamentary Question".(1)
	(1) Page 3, HC 1262, Ministerial Accountability and Parliamentary Questions: Government Response to the Committee's Third Report—First Special Report of Session 2003-04.

Regional Government

Caroline Spelman: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government whether her Department has abandoned the principles of  (a) double devolution,  (b) neighbourhood governance and  (c) earned autonomy.

Phil Woolas: When Comprehensive Performance Assessment (CPA) was introduced, earned autonomy was seen as a driver to improve performance. Now that over 70 per cent. of local authorities have achieved a 3 or 4* CPA ratings, we can move onto presumed autonomy. The Local Government White Paper proposals devolve more power to local authorities and lift centrally imposed burdens on them. As the White Paper makes clear, Government have not changed their policies in regard to double devolution or neighbourhood governance.

Buses: Staffordshire

Brian Jenkins: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport how many accidents involving buses there were in Staffordshire in each of the last five years.

Stephen Ladyman: The number of reported personal injury road accidents involving a bus that took place in Staffordshire in each of the last five years is given in the following table:
	
		
			  Accidents involving a bus in Staffordshire: 2001-05 
			   Number of accidents 
			 2001 164 
			 2002 167 
			 2003 184 
			 2004 131 
			 2005 101

Cycling

Jim Cunningham: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what resources his Department  (a) has provided in the last two years and  (b) intends to provide in the next two years for the creation of a bicycle-friendly road network.

Tom Harris: The Department provides funding for cycling through the integrated block of the Local Transport Plan (LTP) settlement. English local highway authorities outside London have informed the Department that their investment in cycle friendly infrastructure on or around the road network for each of the last two years is £39 million in 2004-05 and £34.1 million in 2005-06. The Department does not require local authorities to provide an estimate of future spend on cycling so no data are yet available for 2006-07 and 2007-08. The integrated block element of the LTP settlement was worth £547 million in 2006-07.
	The Mayor of London receives funding from the Department via a total transport grant through Transport for London (TfL) and received £2.2 billion in both 2004-05 and 2005-06. TfL estimate they have invested £8.49 million in 2004-05 and £12.1 million in 2005-06 on cycle schemes on or around the road network with the majority of expenditure coming from this source. TfL forecast spend will be £15.4 million in 2006-07 and 20.5 million in 2008-09.
	In addition, the Department set up Cycling England in 2005 with a budget of £5 million for 2005-06 to fund their work to encourage more cycling of which £3.1 million was invested in cycle friendly infrastructure. The Secretary of State has since doubled Cycling England's budget to £10 million a year of which £5.7 million has been allocated in 2006-07 on cycle infrastructure and forecast that in 2007-08 will spend a further £3.5 million. The Department also made a one-off investment of £10 million to extend the National Cycle Network to 305 schools in 2004-05.

Government Car Agency

Oliver Heald: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport pursuant to the answer of 15 January 2007,  Official Report, column 752W, on the Government Car Agency, what charge was made by the Government Car and Despatch Agency to  (a) HM Treasury and  (b) the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister in 2005-06 to recover its costs for ministerial transport; and what the estimated charge is for 2006-07.

Stephen Ladyman: I refer the hon. Member to my answer of 8 November 2006,  Official Report, column 1574W, given to the hon. Member for Brentwood and Ongar (Mr. Pickles).

Parkway Station: Gloucestershire

Laurence Robertson: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport at what stage the application for Government funding to build a parkway station at Elmbridge Court, Gloucestershire, between Gloucester and Cheltenham is; and if he will make a statement.

Gillian Merron: holding answer 30 January 2007
	The scheme is currently being assessed by the Department, but we awaiting further information from the local authority before we can take any decision.

Olympic Games

Dai Davies: To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what discussions he has had with the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport on delivering the benefits of the Olympic Games to the whole of the UK with particular reference to the creation of manufacturing jobs for the production of sustainable materials in  (a) Blaenau Gwent and  (b) Wales.

Peter Hain: ales has an important contribution to make to the 2012 Olympic and Paralympic Games, and I meet periodically with the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport to review progress towards maximising the benefits to Wales.
	Companies, large and small, in a range of sectors from construction to manufacturing will be needed to deliver the Games, creating valuable procurement opportunities. The Assembly Government is setting up a Wales 2012 Innovation, Science and Technology group to identify the best of Welsh scientific and technical innovation with potential commercial applications that can be applied to the Games.
	Any business can register its interest in being a supplier to the Games through the London 2012 website. As of 26 January, 533 businesses in Wales had done so.

Personal Accounts

Philip Hammond: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how the figure of increased cost to employers of around 0.7 per cent. of labour costs on average set out on page 36 of the White Paper Personal Accounts: a new way to save was reached.

James Purnell: The figure 0.7 per cent. is derived from expressing the estimated cost of minimum employer contributions, £2.8 billion, as a percentage of total labour costs.
	These figures were estimated using the Employers Pension Provision Survey 2005, Small and Medium-sized Enterprise Statistics 2005 and Annual Survey of Hours and Earnings 2005, as set out in paragraph 4.96 of the RIA.

Personal Accounts

Philip Hammond: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how the estimate that seven million people are under saving referred to on page 18 of the White Paper Personal Accounts: a new way to save was reached; and what account was taken of the estimates made by the Pensions Commission in making that estimate.

James Purnell: Details on the how the DWP's estimate of seven million undersavers was derived were published in annex A to the White Paper Security in retirement: towards a new pension system in May 2006. The DWP estimates are based on a new data source, the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing (ELSA), which was not available to the Pensions Commission, but the same benchmark replacement rates. ELSA collects information on pension wealth accrued to date, and is the best data source available at present.
	The annex also outlines two major reasons for differences between the two estimates. The DWP estimate is based on household level data, while the Pensions Commission's figures are based on individual level data. (This means that an individual with a low pension themselves but whose spouse has enough for both would be counted by the Pensions Commission as an undersaver but not in the DWP's estimates.) The Pensions Commission looked just at pension wealth, while the DWP estimates include other financial assets, non-owner occupied housing wealth and business assets.
	Estimates of the current level of undersaving for retirement are difficult to construct due to: difficulties identifying appropriate saving targets; uncertainties about which kinds of wealth and asset to take into account; difficulties projecting individuals' future saving and working patterns, particularly around choice of retirement age; and reliance on a range of other uncertain assumptions, including the impact of future macro-economic developments. Consequently such estimates should be treated cautiously.

Access Management Grant Scheme

David Drew: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs which access authorities have received funding via the Access Management Grant Scheme since 2004; and how much each received in each year.

Barry Gardiner: Details of payments made under the Access Management Grant Scheme in 2004-05 and 2005-06, as well as commitments made for 2006-07, are as follows:
	
		
			  Payments made 2004-05 
			   £ 
			 Bath and north-east Somerset 2,475.00 
			 Blackburn with Darwen 5,935.63 
			 Bradford 18,397.00 
			 Brighton and Hove 3,997.50 
			 Buckinghamshire 9,262.42 
			 Calderdale 58,543.50 
			 Cornwall 37,501.24 
			 Cumbria 112,872.71 
			 Devon 6,884.00 
			 Dorset 28,938.03 
			 Durham 80,299.74 
			 East Riding of Yorkshire 7,408.53 
			 East Sussex 42,270.54 
			 Hampshire 10,566.00 
			 Herefordshire 5,250.00 
			 Kent 20,963.00 
			 Kirklees 3,580.50 
			 Lancashire 93,228.27 
			 Lincolnshire 8,453.85 
			 North Yorkshire 76,514.72 
			 Northumberland 53,888.18 
			 Oldham 2,982.50 
			 Poole 924.31 
			 Rochdale 1,406.00 
			 Somerset 6,532.44 
			 South Gloucestershire 3,900.00 
			 Suffolk 18,750.00 
			 West Sussex 125,708.15 
			 Wiltshire 5,786.25 
			 Total 853,220.01 
		
	
	
		
			  Payments made 2005-06 
			   £ 
			 Barnsley 11,815.30 
			 Bath and north-east Somerset 10,891.00 
			 Bedfordshire 25,824.00 
			 Bolton 14,691.00 
			 Bradford 3,051.00 
			 Brighton and Hove 2,919.56 
			 Buckinghamshire 30,159.66 
			 Calderdale 53,768.25 
			 Cambridgeshire 10,514.63 
			 Cornwall 50,756.00 
			 Cumbria 228,761.94 
			 Derbyshire 2,110.50 
			 Devon 64,082.00 
			 Doncaster 12,845.00 
			 Dorset 351,490.16 
			 Durham 91,025.80 
			 East Riding of Yorkshire 34,714.15 
			 Essex 10,173.00 
			 Gloucester 40,215.00 
			 Hampshire 24,726.00 
			 Herefordshire 2,831.00 
			 Hertfordshire 9,660.00 
			 Kent 25,573.50 
			 Kirklees 24,037.05 
			 Lancashire 70,751.75 
			 Leeds 6,108.00 
			 Leicestershire 34,264.80 
			 Lincolnshire 6,786.75 
			 Norfolk 400.00 
			 North Lincolnshire 807.00 
			 North Yorkshire 39,026.25 
			 Northumberland 96,894.63 
			 Nottinghamshire 2,190.00 
			 Oldham 6,836.25 
			 Oxfordshire 34,012.50 
			 Poole 7,110.00 
			 Rochdale 3,451.95 
			 Shropshire 68,044.59 
			 Somerset 21,745.50 
			 South Gloucestershire 12,971.00 
			 Staffordshire 12,331.50 
			 Suffolk 120,769.90 
			 South Downs (east Sussex) 134,721.00 
			 Wakefield 5,248.41 
			 West Berkshire 2,049.75 
			 West Sussex 7,842.05 
			 Wiltshire 11,060.00 
			 Worcestershire 24,792.11 
			 Total 1,866,851.19 
		
	
	
		
			  Grant commitments made 2006-07 
			   £ 
			 Barnsley 1,268.01 
			 Bracknell Forest 758.00 
			 Cornwall 4,712.00 
			 Doncaster 23,557.50 
			 Dorset 159,900.00 
			 Durham 4,604.50 
			 Lancashire 59,880.00 
			 Leicestershire 5,000.00 
			 Norfolk 44,076.33 
			 North Yorkshire 33,221.00 
			 Suffolk 6,000.00 
			 Shropshire 27,415.00 
			 Warwickshire 1,950.00 
			 Total 372,342.34

Bullfighting

James Paice: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs how much EU financial support was available to farmers breeding bulls for bullfighting in each of the last five years; how much such support is available to farmers in 2007; and if he will make a statement.

Barry Gardiner: holding answer 26 January 2007
	Bulls kept for bullfighting are eligible for common agricultural policy (CAP) subsidy payments under the beef special premium scheme (BSPS).
	The 2003 CAP reform agreement required member states to introduce the decoupled single payment scheme between 2005 and 2007. However, the agreement also provided the option to forgo some of the single payment scheme funds and use them to retain some of the old coupled premium schemes.
	The three countries most likely to make payments to bulls kept for bullfighting (Spain, Portugal and France) did not take up the option to retain the BSPS and it therefore closed in those countries at the end of 2005. Only Denmark, Finland and Sweden have retained the BSPS.
	Payments under the BSPS are made to eligible bulls and steers and are subject to regional ceilings in each member state. Payments are worth €210 per eligible bull and €150 per steer (on which two payments can be made). The regional ceilings applied to Spain, France and Portugal for the five years before the scheme's closure were:
	
		
			   Country 
			   Spain  Portugal  France 
			 2001 713,999 175,075 1,754,732 
			 2002 643,525 160,720 1,734,779 
			 2003 643,525 160,720 1,734,779 
			 2004 713,999 175,075 1,754,732 
			 2005 713,999 175,075 1,754,732 
		
	
	If claims exceeded these ceilings then payments were scaled back to control expenditure. It is not possible, however, to identify which payments within these totals were made to bulls kept for bullfighting.
	There is also an ongoing proposal, raised within discussions of the EU budget, to exclude bulls kept for bullfighting from the BSPS. The UK Government have, and will continue to, support this proposal.
	In view of the above there is unlikely to be any direct support for bulls kept for bullfighting in 2007.

Countryside and Rights of Way Act

David Drew: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs 
	(1)  whether funding will be provided to access authorities for ongoing costs in relation to Part I of the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000 in 2008-09;
	(2)  what funding his Department has provided for  (a) the implementation and  (b) ongoing work in relation to Part I of the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000 to each access authority in each year since 2004.

Barry Gardiner: National Park authorities are access authorities in National Parks. In relation to any other land, the access authority is the local highway authority in whose area the land is situated.
	The Department's funding to National Parks for the preparation and implementation of the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000 Act (Parts I and V) is as follows:
	
		
			  £ 
			   2004-05  2005-06  2006-07 
			 Broads — 25,000 25,000 
			 Dartmoor 100,000 350,000 350,000 
			 Exmoor 100,000 350,000 350,000 
			 Lake District 400,000 450,000 450,000 
			 New Forest — — 150,000 
			 Northumberland 150,000 350,000 350,000 
			 North York moors 300,000 450,000 450,000 
			 Peak District 500,000 450,000 450,000 
			 Yorkshire Dales 300,000 450,000 450,000 
			 Total 1,850,000 2,875,000 3,025,000

Dairy Farming

Geoffrey Clifton-Brown: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what the balance of trade was in the dairy sector in the last four years; what steps he is taking to improve it; and what assessment he has made of  (a) the cost of milk production and  (b) the producer price paid to farmer.

Barry Gardiner: Over the period January to November 2006 the value of dairy products imported to the UK was £1.6 million and the value of dairy products exported from the UK was £0.6 million, a balance of -£1.0 million.
	The Strategy for Sustainable Farming and Food identifies how the Government will work with the whole of the food chain to secure a sustainable future for English farming and food industries, as viable industries contributing to a better environment and healthy and prosperous communities.
	The most recent published assessment of the cost of milk production was the Defra commissioned study into the economics of milk production in England and Wales in 2002-03 (published by the University of Manchester). Data on farm incomes, including dairy farms, are collected in the Farm Business Survey. The most recent data from the survey covers the year ended February 2006. Defra will be publishing incomes at UK level, by farm type, including dairy farms, on 31 January 2007. This will include forecast incomes for the year ending February 2007.
	Defra collects and publishes milk producer prices on a monthly basis. Average UK prices for 2003 to November 2006 are shown in table 2.
	
		
			  Table 1: Value of UK trade in dairy products 
			  £000 
			   2003  2004  2005  January- November 2006 
			  Imports 
			 Butter 281,102 278,869 309,478 298,615 
			 Buttermilk, Whey and Other Dairy Products 69,040 86,398 116,937 126,411 
			 Cheese 743,898 810,598 853,824 801,283 
			 Condensed Milk 17,770 22,913 33,221 37,312 
			 Cream 16,223 19,908 19,422 17,808 
			 Ice Cream 129,736 142,482 127,658 128,302 
			 Whole and Skimmed Milk 13,641 13,886 16,773 23,836 
			 Whole and Skimmed Milk Powder 44,975 52,170 65,629 58,942 
			 Yoghurt 137,888 139,889 126,673 110,486 
			 Total Dairy Imports 1,454,273 1,567,114 1,669,617 1 ,602,995 
			  
			  Exports 
			 Butter 74,952 59,235 73,216 55,828 
			 Buttermilk, Whey and Other Dairy Products 19,777 46,434 34,330 39,888 
			 Cheese 179,415 201,560 219,476 204,570 
			 Condensed Milk 15,046 10,756 6,470 7,530 
			 Cream 119,558 81,797 72,248 72,616 
			 Ice Cream 47,680 50,464 46,765 48,346 
			 Whole and Skimmed Milk 48,130 58,404 100,503 90,575 
			 Whole and Skimmed Milk Powder 212,035 219,429 115,411 97,929 
			 Yoghurt 14,831 21,359 24,456 23,421 
			 Total Dairy Exports 731,424 749,438 692,874 640,702 
			  
			  Balance of trade 
			 Butter -206,150 -219,634 -236,262 -242,788 
			 Buttermilk, Whey and Other Dairy Products -49,264 -39,964 -82,608 -86,523 
			 Cheese -564,483 -609,038 -634,348 -596,713 
			 Condensed Milk -2,724 -12,158 -26,751 -29,782 
			 Cream 103,335 61 ,889 52,826 54,808 
			 Ice Cream -82,056 -92,018 -80,894 -79,956 
			 Whole and Skimmed Milk 34,489 44,518 83,729 66,738 
			 Whole and Skimmed Milk Powder 167,060 167,259 49,781 38,987 
			 Yoghurt -123,057 -118,531 -102,217 -87,065 
			 Total Dairy Balance of Trade -722,849 -817,676 -976,743 -962,293 
			  Note: 2006 data are subject to amendments  Source: HM Revenue and Customs Data prepared by Trade statistics, Agricultural Statistics and Analysis Division, DEFRA 
		
	
	
		
			  Table 2: UK Average milk producer prices 
			   Average price (pence per litre) 
			 2003 18.03 
			 2004 18.47 
			 2005 18.47 
			 January to November 2006 17.90

Departmental Staff

Stephen O'Brien: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs how much has been  (a) spent on and  (b) allocated to bonuses for staff in his Department in financial years (i) 2006-07, (ii) 2005-06 and (iii) 2004-05; what the highest and lowest bonus paid in each year was; and what percentage of the total sum in each year was related to staff who have responsibility for departmental matters (A) in the North West, (B) in the Eddisbury constituency and (C) for single farm payments.

Barry Gardiner: Payment of non-consolidated performance bonuses reflects the principle across the civil service of rewarding performance increasingly through one-off payments rather than increases to basic salary.
	Core-DEFRA (covering State Veterinary Service, Pesticides Safety Directorate, Veterinary Medicines Directorate, Marine Fisheries Agency and Government Decontamination Service ) operates two different performance bonus systems: in-year high performance bonuses, paid to individuals or teams below the Senior Civil Service (SCS) in recognition of one-off achievement during the year; and annual high performance bonuses, paid to both SCS and non-SCS staff for high performance sustained throughout the whole year.
	For the period November 2004 to March 2005, in year-performance bonuses totalling £179,879 were awarded to staff. Information on annual performance and in-year performance bonuses before this date is available only at disproportionate cost as a result of system changes.
	For the periods April 2005 to March 2006 and April 2006 to date, information on annual and in-year performance bonuses awarded was as follows:
	
		
			  £ 
			  Period  Total bonuses paid  Highest bonus  Lowest bonus 
			 April 2005 to March 2006 3,364,032 34,040 50 
			 April to November 2006 2,933,611 15,000 75 
		
	
	A little over 1 per cent. of paybill is allocated annually for performance related bonuses.
	Information is not held centrally on the geographical areas of responsibility of staff awarded bonuses. Staff with responsibility for single farm payments work in RPA who operate separate pay and bonus arrangements.

Live Animal Exports

Gwyn Prosser: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs how many live  (a) calves,  (b) adult cattle,  (c) sheep and  (d) pigs were exported for (i) slaughter, (ii) fattening and (iii) breeding in 2006, broken down by country of destination.

Barry Gardiner: The following table gives the number of live animals recorded as exported from the UK in 2006 from January to November. December figures are not currently available.
	Please note these figures are obtained using VAT records and will exclude some EU trade for businesses which are below the VAT threshold. As a result, actual trade levels may be higher than those given.
	
		
			  Short description  Description  EU/Non-EU  Country  Number of head 
			 Live swine other than pure bred breeding animals Live dom swine o/t pure bred breeding animals wgt 50 kg or more EU Irish Republic 58,117 
			  Live swine o/t dom spp whg 50 kg or more EU Irish Republic 3,667 
			  
			 Live swine pure bred breeding animals Live swine pure bred breeding animals Non-EU Russia 27,174 
			Ukraine 2,017 
			China 283 
			Taiwan 173 
			Vietnam 231 
			Japan 59 
			Thailand 111 
			South Korea 43 
			   EU Belgium 3,040 
			Netherlands 1,683 
			Greece 1,137 
			Germany 894 
			Spain 661 
			Italy 454 
			Hungary 425 
			Denmark 306 
			Slovenia 132 
			  
			 Other than pure bred breeding animals bovine Bovines of a wgt exc 80 kg but n/e 160 kg, not for slaughter EU Netherlands 14,165 
			  Of a weight not exceeding 80 kg EU Belgium 340 
			Netherlands 167 
			  Live bovine animals o/t dom spp Non-EU Romania 39 
			   EU Irish Republic 78 
			  
			 Sheep live Lambs (up to a year old) EU France 6,992 
			  Sheep pure bred breeding animals Non-EU Romania 110 
			  Sheep o/t pure-bred breeding animals and lambs up to a year old EU Irish Republic 7 
			 Pure bred breeding animals bovine Heifers (female bovines that have never calved) Non-EU Switzerland 21 
			  Pure-bred breeding bovines o/t heifers and cows Non-EU Switzerland 3 
			  Notes; 1. 2006 data are subject to amendments 2. EU data based on EU 25  Source: HM Revenue and Customs Data prepared by Trade statistics, Agricultural Statistics and Analysis Division, DEFRA

Nitrate Vulnerable Zones

David Drew: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs whether he plans to designate England as a nitrate vulnerable zone.

Ian Pearson: The Nitrates Directive requires member states to designate as nitrate vulnerable zones (NVZs) any land draining to waters identified as polluted, or likely to be polluted, by nitrates from agricultural sources. These designations must be reviewed at least every four years. Nearly 55 per cent. of land in England is currently designated as NVZs.
	The directive further requires an action programme to be established and implemented within the designated NVZs to protect the identified waters .The directive offers member states the option of applying action programme measures across the whole of its national territory. The four-yearly review of designations is not required where this option is followed. The Government have opted to take a discrete area approach to implementing the directive.
	A review of NVZ designations, as required by the directive, is nearing completion. Depending on the outcome, consideration may be given to adopting a whole territory approach and to applying action programme measures throughout England. This issue would be subject to a full public consultation.

Privacy Impact Assessments

Eric Pickles: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs whether a privacy impact assessment has  (a) been produced and  (b) is planned in relation to plans to introduce (i) variable waste charging for domestic rubbish and (ii) microchips in wheelie bins.

Ben Bradshaw: England's Waste Strategy is currently being reviewed. In this context, Defra is considering the full range of tools that could encourage producers and consumers to reduce waste and increase recycling. The use of financial incentives, such as recycling rebates, is only one of a number of options being considered.
	Microchips are identification tags which allow a bin to be matched to a particular property—they do not record information on what is put into the bin. There are other methods of providing people with positive incentives to recycle.
	The Conservative run Local Government Association has requested a change in the law to allow local authorities to introduce such positive incentives.

Procurement Projects

John Hayes: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what the 20 largest procurement projects initiated by his Department since May 1997 have been; what the  (a) original budget,  (b) cost to date and  (c) consultancy fees have been; and what the final cost was of each project which has been completed.

Barry Gardiner: The Department came into being in June 2001. From information held centrally, the 20 largest procurement projects initiated by the Department are as follows:
	
		
			   Project title  Awarded in financial year April to March  Budget (£ million) 
			 1 Enabling IT. 2004- 05 850 
			 2 Eradicating Fuel Poverty—Warm Front Programme 2005- 06 338.6 
			 3 Envlrowise Consultancy and Marketing 2005- 06 50 
			 4 Scrapie Testing and Equipment (Genotyping) 2001- 02 42 
			 5 England Catchment Sensitive Farming 2006- 07 35 
			 6 ERDP IT 2001- 02 35 
			 7 Nobel House Redevelopment 2003- 04 25 
			 8 Seed Certification—Provision of Services in Respect of UK Plant Breeders 2005- 06 24.3 
			 9 Temporary Staff 2006- 07 20 
			 10 Facilities Management—London 2003- 04 20 
			 11 Facilities Management—North East and Anglia 2001- 02 18 
			 12 Travel 2005- 06 16 
			 13 Facilities Management—North West 2002- 03 14 
			 14 Facilities Management—South West 2002- 03 14 
			 15 Facilities Management—South East and Reading 2001- 02 13 
			 16 North East Region Premises Solution 2006- 07 12.5 
			 17 Learning and Development Framework 2005- 06 10 
			 18 Waste Implementation Programme—Framework 2006- 07 10 
			 19 Veterinary Surveillance 2002- 03 9.7 
			 20 Lappel Bank Fagbury flats compensation (Wallasea) 2004-06(1) 8.63 
			 (1) Various activities, including land purchase and earth works. 
		
	
	The core-Department does not hold a central list of what the original budget, cost to date and any consultancy fees have been, nor does it hold centrally what the final cost has been in each case where the projects have been completed. The information could be provided only at disproportionate cost. Of the procurement projects listed, all are current, except procurement project 8 which is completed.
	The budget figures quoted are the overall values of the programmes and projects in which there has been a procurement element; and are not necessarily the actual values of contracts or framework agreements associated with the programmes or projects. Costs of programmes and projects are subject to change arising from amended programme and project scope, budgetary re-allocation, and re-consideration of departmental objectives.

Soil Association

Geoffrey Clifton-Brown: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what grant his Department has recently given to the Soil Association; and for what purpose.

Barry Gardiner: DEFRA has made the following recent grant payments to the Soil Association and its associated certification companies, Soil Association Certification Limited and ASCISCO.
	 (a) Payments made by DEFRA to Soil Association Certification Limited and ASCISCO as part of the partnership agreement with organic certification bodies in connection with the implementation of the EU Organic inspection regime:
	2006-07—£276,456.84
	 (b) Grant payments to the Soil Association under the Rural Enterprise Scheme (RES) and Vocational Training Scheme (VTS)
	
		
			  Scheme  Project start date ( 1) Total grant awarded to project (£)  Project description 
			 Rural Enterprise Scheme 1 August 2006 11,200 Feasibility study for a regional organic network in Yorkshire 
			 Rural Enterprise Scheme 11 August 2006 173,736 Supplementary funding for the organic element of the North West Fantastic Food Partnership 
			 Vocational Training Scheme 24 August 2006 32,435.50 Organic training for converting and existing producers 
			 Rural Enterprise Scheme 1 October 2006 100,409.10 Business and marketing support for the organic food and farming sector 
			 (1)This figure is the amount awarded for the whole project period, including years beyond 2006.

Tobacco

James Paice: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs how much EU financial support was available for growing tobacco in each of the last five years; how much such financial support was available in 2007; which countries have received this support; and if he will make a statement.

Barry Gardiner: holding answer 26 January 2007
	The information requested is set out as follows:
	
		
			  Cost of premia paid under the EU tobacco regime 
			   € million 
			 2002 952 
			 2003 956 
			 2004 929 
			 2005 916 
			 2006 920 
			 2007 (provisional) 317 
		
	
	The main beneficiaries of the European Union (EU) subsidy have been Greece and Italy. Other producing member states include Poland, France, Spain, Germany and Portugal.
	The UK does not produce tobacco and has always been critical of the support regime because of the cost and health implications. We believe that subsidies are at odds with the Community-sponsored Europe Against Cancer programme.
	The successful reform of the EU tobacco regime in 2004 introduced "decoupling", which means that the direct link between production and support is broken. This applies progressively from 2006 until 2010 when direct support for tobacco production will cease altogether.

Woodlands

Gregory Barker: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs how much coniferous woodland has been planted in the UK during the last 10 years.

Barry Gardiner: The total areas of conifer planting (new planting and restocking) over the last 10 years for each country and the UK total are given in the following tables.
	
		
			  England 
			  Hectares—thousand 
			  Year ended 31 March  New planting  Restocking  Total 
			 1997 0.5 2.7 3.2 
			 1998 0.6 2.9 3.5 
			 1999 0.7 2.7 3.5 
			 2000 0.7 2.5 3.2 
			 2001 0.7 2.7 3.4 
			 2002 0.7 2.6 3.2 
			 2003 0.5 2.4 3.0 
			 2004 0.2 2.3 2.5 
			 2005 0.2 1.9 2.1 
			 2006 0.1 2.1 2.2 
		
	
	
		
			  Scotland 
			  Hectares—thousand 
			  Year ended 31 March  New planting  Restocking  Total 
			 1997 6.7 5.8 12.5 
			 1998 5.9 5.3 11.3 
			 1999 5.3 5.3 10.6 
			 2000 5.2 6.5 11.7 
			 2001 3.9 6.6 10.6 
			 2002 3.0 6.6 9.6 
			 2003 3.0 7.4 10.3 
			 2004 2.6 7.6 10.2 
			 2005 1.9 8.0 9.9 
			 2006 1.0 7.1 8.1 
		
	
	
		
			  Wales 
			  Hectares—thousand 
			  Year ended 31 March  New planting  Restocking  Total 
			 1997 0.1 2.6 2.6 
			 1998 0.1 2.3 2.5 
			 1999 0.1 2.7 2.9 
			 2000 0.2 2.4 2.6 
			 2001 0.1 1.9 2.0 
			 2002 0.0 1.6 1.6 
			 2003 0.0 1.6 1.6 
			 2004 0.0 1.4 1.4 
			 2005 0.0 1.2 1.2 
			 2006 0.0 1.6 1.6 
		
	
	
		
			  Northern Ireland 
			  Hectares—thousand 
			  Year ended 31 March  New planting  Restocking  Total 
			 1997 0.5 0.5 1.0 
			 1998 0.4 0.6 1.0 
			 1999 0.4 0.5 0.9 
			 2000 0.4 0.5 0.9 
			 2001 0.4 1.0 1.4 
			 2002 0.2 0.7 0.9 
			 2003 0.5 0.6 1.1 
			 2004 0.1 0.9 1.0 
			 2005 0.0 0.9 0.9 
			 2006 0.0 0.8 0.8 
		
	
	
		
			  United Kingdom 
			  Hectares—thousand 
			  Year ended 31 March  New planting  Restocking  Total 
			 1997 7.7 11.6 19.3 
			 1998 7.0 11.2 18.2 
			 1999 6.6 11.3 17.9 
			 2000 6.5 11.9 18.4 
			 2001 5.1 12.2 17.4 
			 2002 3.9 11.4 15.3 
			 2003 4.0 12.0 16.0 
			 2004 2.9 12.1 15.1 
			 2005 2.1 12.0 14.1 
			 2006 1.1 11.6 12.7 
			  Note: The figures in the tables are individually rounded, so the constituent items may not sum to the total given.

Entertainment Budget

Oliver Heald: To ask the Prime Minister pursuant to the answer of 11 January 2007,  Official Report, column 650W, on entertainment budget, whether the figures referred to on the costs of official entertainment at 10 Downing street and Chequers in 2005-06 provided to the hon. Members for South Holland and The Deepings and for Southend, West in answers of 11 October 2005,  Official Report, column 788W, were collected using the same methodology as those in the answer of 21 July 2005,  Lords Official Report, column WA262.

Tony Blair: Yes.

Departmental Costs

Oliver Heald: To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster pursuant to the answer of 27 November 2006,  Official Report, column 346W, on departmental costs, what the reasons are for the change in expenditure between 2004-05 and 2005-06.

Hilary Armstrong: The main reasons for the change in expenditure between 2004-05 and 2005-06 was the inclusion in 2004-05 of the Cabinet Office's £2 million contribution to the cross-government 'Go in, Stay in, Tune in' campaign and costs associated with the DirectGov advertising campaign.

Social Enterprise

Chris Ruane: To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster what the name and location is of each social enterprise ambassador in England.

Edward Miliband: The Government published the social enterprise action plan on 16 November 2006. It states that the Office of the Third Sector will work with the social enterprise sector to develop a programme which will appoint 20 social enterprise ambassadors to raise awareness of social enterprise and work with Government on the development of policy.
	The Office of the Third Sector is currently developing the programme in partnership with the social enterprise sector. We are aiming to announce the new ambassadors in the summer to ensure that they are ready to participate fully in the run up to the next Social Enterprise Day, which will be on 15 November 2007 as part of Enterprise Week.
	Once selected, a copy of the list of the names of the social enterprise ambassadors will be placed in the Library for the reference of Members.

Social Enterprise

Chris Ruane: To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster what Government assistance is available to establish social enterprises.

Edward Miliband: Government help available to establish social enterprise is described in the Social Enterprise Action plan—Scaling new heights—published on 16 November 2006. In particular, the Government aims to foster a culture of social enterprise and ensure that the right information, advice and finance are available to those running social enterprises.
	To foster a culture of social enterprise, the Government will work with the sector to raise the level of awareness of social enterprise and to show that financial success and social and environmental benefits can be achieved together. For example the Office of the Third Sector will work with the sector to develop a programme to appoint 20 social enterprise ambassadors to raise awareness of social enterprise, and work with government on the development of policy. In addition Government are working with Enterprise Insight to attract young people into social enterprise through the new "Make Your Mark: Change Lives" campaign.
	The Business Link Service is the Government's gateway to support for small businesses. Funding will be provided from April 2007 to Regional Development Agencies to boost Business Link's capacity to broker business support for social enterprise. From an initial pilot level of at least £0.5 million in 2007-08, the funding will rise to £1.8 million per year from April 2008 to March 2011. This will help ensure that the right information and advice are available to those running social enterprises.

Special Advisers

Oliver Heald: To ask the Minister without Portfolio whether her special advisers have  (a) conducted work and  (b) provided advice to her on the funding of financing of political parties in the last 12 months.

Hazel Blears: My special advisers provide me with advice in accordance with the provisions of the 'Code of Conduct for Special Advisers'.

V Charity

Mark Hoban: To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster what estimate she has made of the cost of administration for the charity v to date.

Edward Miliband: I refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave him on 18 January 2007,  Official Report, column 1312W.

V Charity

Mark Hoban: To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster pursuant to the answer of 17 January 2007,  Official Report, column 1207W, on the v charity, whether the figures for  (a) marketing and communications and  (b) web portal development are for youth volunteering projects or the administration of the charity v.

Edward Miliband: The funds provided to v for  (a) marketing and communications and  (b) web portal development are restricted grants that have allowed v to provide information to individuals and organisations on how to apply for project grants for youth volunteering opportunities, increase awareness of youth volunteering, and develop a web portal that will allow young people to look for appropriate volunteering opportunities and register their interest or participation in particular opportunities. The web portal will provide specific identifier numbers to allow young people to evaluate the opportunities they have taken part in, provide feedback and log the volunteering opportunities they have attended.

British Household Panel Survey

John Spellar: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry pursuant to the answer of 15 January 2007,  Official Report, column 1144W, on British household panel survey, for what reason his Department considers living in  (a) a household with no other individuals, either adults or children and  (b) accommodation that is rented from either a local authority or from a housing association an indicator of disadvantage.

Malcolm Wicks: These measures were among a wide range of indicators of social disadvantage used in a report on multiple disadvantage (using the British Household Panel Survey (BHPS)) commissioned by the then Office of the Deputy Prime Minister (ODPM) in 2003. Some of the measure are indicative of social disadvantage in a broad sense, without in themselves being direct measures of disadvantage.
	The ODPM published a report based on this work in September 2004 as "Low income and multiple disadvantage 1991 to 2001: Analysis of the British Household Panel Survey for the Social Exclusion Unit in the Breaking the Cycle Series".
	This report contains details of the results of the research, which was carried out on behalf of the Social Exclusion Unit by the University of Essex.
	Social exclusion unit report:
	www.socialexclusionunit.gov.uk/publications.asp?id=276.

Energy Saving

Geraldine Smith: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if he will launch an advertising campaign to encourage people to save energy.

Ian Pearson: I have been asked to reply.
	The Government are committed to raising awareness on climate change, and its links to energy use. Defra, the Department for Trade and Industry, and associated agencies and non-departmental public bodies currently run a number of different climate change-related communications activities focused on specific issues and target audiences. These include campaigns to address business and household energy efficiency, renewable power generation, low-carbon transport and climate change impacts.
	The Energy Saving Trust (EEST), which is funded by Defra to promote energy efficiency in the household sector, runs campaigns to encourage consumers to take energy saving action. EST's "Save Your 20 per cent." marketing campaign is a key source of information and a call to action for consumers to reduce their energy use and install energy efficient measures.
	In addition, Defra is developing a CO2 calculator. This will be launched in the spring and promoted with an advertising campaign. It will help individuals to calculate their CO2 footprint enable them to make more informed choices about how to save energy.

Engagements

Susan Kramer: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry with which non-government organisations he has had meetings to discuss energy policy since he took office; and how many such meetings have taken place.

Malcolm Wicks: My right hon. Friend, the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry, and my noble Friend the Minister for Energy and I have held regular discussions since May 2006 with a wide variety of non-government organisations, including the UK Business Council for Sustainable Energy (UKBCSE), Green Alliance, CBI, Institute of Directors, British Chambers of Commerce, the Trade Union Sustainable Advisory Committee (TUSAC), and the Carbon Trust as well as a large number of individual companies and trade associations, on a range of energy issues including the Energy Review; energy prices; short term and long term security of supply; low carbon energy; and European and international energy policy. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State and the CBI jointly chair the Business Energy Forum where energy issues are discussed at a strategic level with Ofgem and key industry bodies.

Environmental Liability Directive

Alan Simpson: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what meetings on which dates since May 2004  (a) Ministers and  (b) officials in his Department have had with (i) industry employees, (ii) members of trade bodies and (iii) members of non-governmental organisations in relation to the implementation of the environmental liability directive in the UK; and what organisations were represented at each meeting.

Malcolm Wicks: The Department has liaised with the Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs since 2002 (start of the negotiations) to the present concerning the transposition of the environmental liability directive.
	Throughout this time, the Department has held meetings, in conjunction with Defra, with members of the trade and non-governmental organisations and these are listed in a table which has been placed in the Libraries of the House as Defra's written answer, on 29 January 2007,  Official Report, column 12W.
	In addition to the above meetings, the Department held a meeting with the Association of Electricity Producers on 29 January 2007.

Executive Agencies

Nick Hurd: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry which of the executive agencies of his Department have regional offices outside London.

Jim Fitzpatrick: The Department is responsible for the following five Executive agencies: Small Business Service, Companies House, the Insolvency Service, Patent Office and National Weights and Measures Laboratory (NWML). Their offices outside London are as follows:
	Small Business Service has an office in Sheffield.
	The Patent Office HQ is in South Wales.
	Companies House HQ is in Cardiff and has an office in Edinburgh.
	National Weights and Measures Laboratory (NWML) HQ is in Teddington.
	The Insolvency Service has the following offices.
	
		
			   Number 
			 East of England 6 
			 South West 5 
			 South East 5 
			 East Midland 3 
			 West Midland 3 
			 Yorkshire and Humber 3 
			 North East 2 
			 North West 5 
			 Wales 2 
			 Scotland 2

Parliamentary Questions

Theresa May: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry how many written parliamentary questions to his Department in the 2005-06 session were not answered wholly or in part on grounds of disproportionate cost.

Jim Fitzpatrick: This information is not held in the format requested. However, the Libraries of the House keep a record of all questions answered and according to their data the DTI cited disproportionate cost in 18 answers out of a total of 5,146 answered during the 2005-06 session.

Post Offices

Christopher Fraser: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry how his Department defines  (a) urban,  (b) rural and  (c) remote areas in the context of access criteria in the Post Office Network Consultation Document.

Jim Fitzpatrick: In relation to the Post Office Network consultation document, an urban area is defined as a settlement of more than 10,000 inhabitants. A rural area is defined as a settlement of less than 10,000 inhabitants. There is no departmental definition of a remote area as no access criteria proposals relate solely to 'remote' areas.
	Alongside the Government's proposed national access criteria, is the criterion that 95 per cent. of the population in postcode districts should be within six miles of a post office service. Implicit in this criterion is a safeguard for people in remote areas who might otherwise not have been assured of reasonable accessibility to services under nationally-applied criteria alone.

Renewable Energy

Ben Wallace: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what  (a) funding and  (b) grant programmes are available for research into the use of tidal power; and if he will make a statement.

Malcolm Wicks: The Government has in place a number of initiatives that support tidal power.
	Since 2000 around £20 million has been committed to support research and development of tidal-stream energy technologies under the DTI Technology Programme, and a further £50 million has been made available under the DTI's Marine Renewables Deployment Fund to support the first larger-scale pre-commercial grid- connected wave and tidal-stream demonstration projects.
	The Research Council's Supergen Marine Energy Research Consortium has, since 2003, conducted a £2.6 million research into marine renewable energy including tidal energy.
	The Government's main mechanism for supporting renewable energy is the renewables obligation (RO). The RO is a market-based mechanism, which requires electricity suppliers to source an increasing percentage of their electricity sales from eligible sources of renewable energy providing a substantial market incentive for renewable energy, including tidal power. The Government recently announced, in the Energy Review Report, their intention to consider 'banding' the RO, so as to give more support to emerging energy technologies including tidal power.
	It also announced that the DTI, together with the Welsh Assembly Government, are working with the Sustainable Development Commission, the South West Regional Development Agency and other key interested parties to explore the issues arising on the tidal resource in the UK, including the Severn estuary, including potential costs and benefits of development using a range of tidal technologies and their public acceptability. The study is due to report in June 2007.
	The above does not include support for research made available from the devolved administrations, regional development agencies or the European Commission.

Right to Strike

Graham Brady: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry in preparing submissions to the European Court of Justice on the Viking case, what view his Department has taken on the question of whether the right to strike is protected in EU law as a fundamental right.

Jim Fitzpatrick: The Viking case highlights the (complexities) conflict which may exist between national laws, which in some member states include the right to strike, and the European treaty. The Government intervened in this case to maintain the status quo including, in some circumstances, the right to take collective action.

Smart Metering

Martin Horwood: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry 
	(1)  what projection he has made of the effect of smart metering on consumers' domestic energy usage;
	(2)  whether the Government plans to carry out research on the effect of smart metering on consumer domestic energy usage.

Malcolm Wicks: As part of the Energy Review, the Government are currently consulting on a range of metering and billing issues, including smart metering. Trials of smart meters and other devices, which the Government are co-funding with supplier-led consortia, will also begin shortly. These trials will test a range of approaches to encourage consumers to reduce energy consumption.

Autism and Special Needs

Janet Dean: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills how many pupils with  (a) an autistic spectrum disorder and  (b) special educational needs were (i) temporarily excluded and (ii) permanently excluded from a maintained (A) primary and (B) secondary school in each of the last five years, broken down by ethnic group.

Parmjit Dhanda: The available information is given in the following tables.
	The information the DfES collects on excluded pupils is broken down to show whether they have special educational needs (SEN) but does not extend to type of SEN. The information provided in this response relates to excluded pupils with SEN (both with and without statements).
	The first year for which information on fixed period exclusions is available relates to the 2003-04 academic year. Data on exclusions are collected retrospectively. Exclusions data for 2004-05 academic year were published in June 2006. The available information relating to fixed period exclusions during 2003-04 and 2004-05 has been provided.
	
		
			  Maintained primary and secondary schools( 1) : number of fixed period exclusions by ethnic group and special educational needs( 2) , 2003-04 and 2004-05, England 
			   Pupils with statements of SEN and pupils with SEN without statements( 3) 
			   Primary  Secondary 
			   2003-04  2004-05  2003-04  2004-05 
			   Number  Percentage  Number  Percentage  Number  Percentage  Number  Percentage 
			  White  23,310  4.1  24,730  4.3  107,080  24.6  121,890  26.8 
			 White British 22,620 4.1 24,000 4.4 104,660 24.8 118,990 27.0 
			 Irish 80 2.7 130 4.6 470 23.1 470 23.1 
			 Traveller of Irish heritage 120 7.8 120 6.7 180 36.8 230 45.7 
			 Gypsy/Roma 170 7.2 180 7.4 320 38.5 510 50.5 
			 Any other White background 330 2.2 310 1.9 1,440 13.4 1,700 15.6 
			  
			  Mixed  1,240  5.6  1,370  5.8  4,180  32.9  5,260  37.9 
			 White and Black Caribbean 670 7.4 710 7.4 2,330 41.8 2,950 47.4 
			 White and Black African 130 5.8 110 4.4 310 26.3 430 31.5 
			 White and Asian 120 3.6 100 2.8 360 20.4 490 25.8 
			 Any other Mixed background 320 4.2 440 5.6 1,180 28.0 1,390 31.8 
			  
			  Asian  460  1.0  510  1.0  3,330  10.7  3,680  11.1 
			 Indian 50 0.5 70 0.6 580 7.1 750 9.3 
			 Pakistani 300 1.2 320 1.2 2,000 13.2 1,980 12.1 
			 Bangladeshi 60 0.7 60 0.6 520 9.8 630 11.0 
			 Any other Asian background 50 1.3 60 1.4 240 9.2 330 10.7 
			  
			  Black  1,890  5.4  2,040  5.4  5,880  24.3  6,620  26.4 
			 Black Caribbean 1,090 7.4 1,110 7.5 3,340 29.1 3,540 30.9 
			 Black African 570 3.4 720 3.9 1,570 16.1 1,970 18.5 
			 Any other Black background 240 6.2 210 5.1 980 32.7 1,110 37.8 
			  
			  Chinese  #  #  10  0.7  40  3.3  50  4.4 
			  
			  Any other ethnic group  90  1.4  110  1.6  610  13.6  700  14.1 
			  
			  Unclassified( 5)  1,590  n/a  1,360  n/a  8,630  n/a  8,650  n/a 
			  
			  All pupils( 2)  28,580  4.1  30,120  4.3  129,740  24.5  146,860  26.7 
			 n/a = not applicable # = less than five exclusions, or a rate based on less than 5 exclusions. (1) Includes middle schools as deemed. (2) Includes pupils of compulsory school age and above. (3) Pupils with SEN without statements includes those pupils supported at School Action and at School Action Plus. (4) The number of exclusions expressed as a percentage of the school population of same ethnic origin with special educational needs (both with and without statements). (5) Includes pupils whose ethnic group has not been classified, or has been classified using a different coding framework.  Note: Numbers have been rounded to the nearest 10  Source: Termly Exclusions Survey and Schools Census 
		
	
	A change in the categories for recording ethnicity data means that comparable figures on the ethnicity of excluded pupils are only available from 2003-04 onwards.
	There are quality issues with data on permanent exclusions. A significant number of schools are known to have under-reported the situation. The Department has carried out checking exercises in each year to confirm the overall number of permanent exclusions. However, this only confirmed the number of exclusions in each local authority area and did not include information on the characteristics (such as SEN provision and ethnic group) of the excluded pupil. Figures provided in this response relating to permanent exclusions are as reported by schools and are known to be incomplete. The data are not sufficiently reliable or robust to provide detailed ethnic breakdowns by SEN provision.
	
		
			  Maintained primary and secondary schools( 1) : number of permanent exclusions by ethnic group and special educational needs( 2,3) , 2003-04 and 2004-05, England 
			   Pupils with statements of SEN and pupils without statements( 4) 
			   Primary  Secondary 
			   2003-04  2004-05  2003-04  2004-05 
			   Number  Percentage( 5)  Number  Percentage( 5)  Number  Percentage( 5)  Number  Percentage( 5) 
			 White(6) 760 0.13 250 0.04 3,760 0.86 3,600 0.79 
			 Mixed(7) 60 0.25 20 0.09 200 1.55 220 1.60 
			 Asian(8) 10 0.02 10 0.01 90 0.30 110 0,32 
			 Black(9) 70 0.18 20 0.06 310 1.28 290 1.16 
			 Other(10) 10 0.06 # 0.02 30 0.56 20 0.36 
			 Unclassified(11) 40 n/a 10 n/a 220 n/a 180 n/a 
			 Total 930 0.13 310 0.04 4,610 0.87 4,420 0.80 
			 n/a = not applicable # = less than five exclusions, or a rate based on less than five exclusions. (1) Includes middle schools as deemed. (2) There are quality issues with permanent exclusions data for these years. Schools are known to have under-reported the situation. Figures shown here are as reported by schools and are unconfirmed. Caution is recommended when interpreting this output (3) Includes only those pupils of compulsory school age and above. (4) Pupils with SEN without statements includes those pupils supported at School Action and at School Action Plus. (5) The number of exclusions expressed as a percentage of the school population of same ethnic origin with special educational needs (both with and without statements). (6) Includes pupils whose ethnic group has been classified as White British, Irish, Traveller of Irish heritage, Gypsy/Roma or any other White background. (7) Includes pupils whose ethnic group has been classified as White and Black Caribbean, White and Black African, White and Asian or any other Mixed background. (8) Includes pupils whose ethnic group has been classified as Indian, Pakistani, Bangladeshi or any other Asian background. (9) Includes pupils whose ethnic group has been classified as Black Caribbean, Black African or any other Black background. (10) Includes pupils whose ethnic group has been classified as Chinese or any other ethnic group. (11) Includes pupils whose ethnic group has not been classified, or has been classified using a different coding framework.  Note: Numbers have been rounded to the nearest 10.  Source: Schools Census

Autism and Special Needs

Janet Dean: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills how many pupils there are in maintained  (a) primary and  (b) secondary schools with (i) an autistic spectrum disorder and (ii) special educational needs, broken down by ethnic group.

Parmjit Dhanda: The requested information is given in the table.
	Information was collected from schools on pupils who are supported at "School Action Plus" and those pupils with a statement of special educational needs (SEN) about their main or primary need and, if appropriate, their secondary need for the first time in 2004.
	There are a number of sensitivities about categorising pupils by their type of SEN. It is important that anyone using the data should be aware of the concerns and also understand the limitations of the data's reliability and validity. There are a range of factors which may affect the data recorded, including:
	Local interpretation of definitions
	Classification of children with multiple needs
	Differences in diagnoses between education and health professionals
	Availability of special school provisions in authorities
	
		
			  Maintained primary and secondary schools( 1) : Number and percentage of pupils with special educational needs (SEN)( 2) —as at January 2006—England 
			   Pupils of compulsory school age and above( 3) 
			   Primary  Secondary  Primary  Secondary 
			   Number of pupils with autistic spectrum disorder( 4)  Percentage of pupils with an autistic spectrum disorder( 5)  Number of pupils with autistic spectrum disorder( 4)  Percentage of pupils with an autistic spectrum disorder( 5)  Number of pupils with SEN( 6)  Percentage of pupils with SEN( 7)  Number of pupils with SEN( 6)  Percentage of pupils with SEN( 7) 
			 White 13,420 6.0 9,250 4.8 581,110 21.3 478,450 17.3 
			 White British 12,920 6.0 8,990 4.9 555,630 21.2 461,550 17.3 
			 Irish 80 7.4 50 5.8 2,720 22.0 2,120 17.3 
			 Traveller of Irish heritage (8)— (8)— (8)— (8)— 1,810 60.4 560 52.9 
			 Gypsy/Roma 10 0.7 (8)— (8)— 2,620 50.9 1,150 50.1 
			 Any other White background 410 6.6 210 4.5 18,330 20.8 13,070 17.5 
			  
			 Mixed 630 6.5 260 4.0 25,650 21.8 16,030 19.0 
			 White and Black Caribbean 210 5.4 70 2.5 10,110 25.2 7,170 23.5 
			 White and Black African 70 6.5 30 4.3 2,820 22.5 1,540 19.2 
			 White and Asian 100 6.9 50 5.9 4,070 16.8 2,300 13.6 
			 Any other Mixed background 260 7.7 110 5.3 8,650 21.3 5,030 17.4 
			  
			 Asian 550 3.2 180 1.6 54,620 20.6 37,060 16.8 
			 Indian 180 5.2 80 3.3 11,690 15.0 8,440 10.7 
			 Pakistani 220 2.5 60 1.0 27,780 25.2 18,530 22.4 
			 Bangladeshi 70 2.1 20 0.8 10,330 22.2 6,420 19.6 
			 Any other Asian background 80 5.7 20 2.0 4,830 15.5 3,680 13.7 
			  
			 Black 770 5.2 210 2.0 40,270 27.2 27,390 23.3 
			 Black Caribbean 260 4.5 100 2.0 14,920 30.7 11,780 27.3 
			 Black African 420 5.8 70 1.7 20,980 25.0 12,440 20.6 
			 Any other Black background 90 5.2 40 2.8 4,370 27.7 3,170 22.9 
			  
			 Chinese 50 9.7 30 5.5 1,310 11.8 1,330 10.3 
			  
			 Any other ethnic group 90 3.5 30 1.9 8,020 21.5 5,560 18.7 
			  
			 Unclassified(4) 220 n/a 260 n/a 11,640 n/a 14,600 n/a 
			  
			 All pupils(2) 15,720 5.8 10,200 4.5 722,610 21.6 580,420 17.6 
			 n/a = not applicable. (1) Includes middle schools as deemed. (2) Excludes dually registered pupils. (3) Pupils aged 5 and over are classified according to their ethnic group. (4) Pupils at "School Action Plus" and those pupils with statements of SEN provide information on their primary need and, if appropriate, their secondary need. Information on primary need only is given here. (5) The number of pupils with an autistic spectrum disorder expressed as a percentage of pupils at "School Action Plus" and those pupils with statements of SEN. (6) Pupils with SEN, both with and without statements. (7) The number of pupils with SEN (both with and without statements) expressed as a percentage of the total number of pupils of same ethnic origin. (8) Less than 5 pupils or a rate based on less than 5 pupils.  Note: Pupil numbers have been rounded to the nearest 10  Source: Schools Census

Child Care

Rosie Cooper: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what percentage of families in West Lancashire  (a) are eligible for and  (b) have taken up (i) free and (ii) subsidised child care.

Beverley Hughes: Information is not available in the form requested.
	Figures available from the Office for National Statistics for December 2005 show that West Lancashire parliamentary constituency had a population of 2,400(1) three and four-year-olds, and the 2006 Early Years and Annual Schools Censuses show the number of part-time early education places funded by the free entitlement for three and four-year-olds in the West Lancashire parliamentary constituency was 1,900(2).
	Data on eligibility and take up of free or subsidised child care overall is not available centrally.
	Child care used by parents can be subsidised in a variety of ways, including the child care element of the working tax credit, local authority subsidies, Jobcentre Plus New Deals, Care to Learn, Learner Support Funds and NHS child care allowances.
	(1) ONS population estimates are aggregated to age groupings of at least five years. Figures based on a single year of age at the sub-national level are therefore of limited reliability.
	(2 )The number of children benefiting from some form of free early education can exceed the number of free part-time early education places taken up by children as a place may be taken up by more than one child.

Children: Databases

Annette Brooke: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills when he expects to publish a full evaluation of the outcomes from the trailblazing authorities on information sharing on children.

Beverley Hughes: 11 local authority Trailblazers' have piloted information sharing approaches with financial support from my department, nine of which developed local indexes.
	In 2004, an independent research report about the Trailblazer experiences: Developing Information Sharing and Assessment Systems was published. On 8 December 2005, I laid in the House of Commons' Library the report 'Learning from Information Sharing and Assessment Trailblazers' detailing the main lessons learnt from the Trailblazer authorities' work.
	The Trailblazers have continued to influence the development of tools to support better information sharing, including national, cross-Government guidance on Information Sharing published in 2006 and supporting training materials. They continue to work closely with the national Information Sharing Index Project, which draws extensively on their experience and expertise.
	There are no plans to publish any further evaluation of the Trailblazers.

Education: North-east England

Stephen Hepburn: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills how many people in  (a) Jarrow constituency,  (b) South Tyneside,  (c) the North East and  (d) England have received education maintenance allowance in each year since its inception; and how much each grant of allowance was in each year since inception.

Phil Hope: This is a matter for the Learning and Skills Council, who operate Education Maintenance Allowances for the DfES and hold the information about take-up of the scheme. Mark Haysom, the Council's chief executive, has written to my hon. Friend with the information requested and a copy of his reply has been placed in the House Libraries.
	 Letter from Mark Haysom, dated 29 January 2007:
	I am writing in response to your Parliamentary Question 115354 that asked; "How many people in (a) Jarrow constituency, (b) South Tyneside, (c) the North East and (d) England have received education maintenance allowance in each year since its inception; and how much each allowance was worth in every year since inception."
	Information on the number of young people who have applied, enrolled and received Education Maintenance Allowance (EMA) is available at Local Authority Level, but not at constituency level. EMA take-up is defined as young people who have received one or more EMA payments in the academic year. Financial information is only available at National Level, not at Local Authority Level.
	The following table shows EMA take-up data for South Tyneside Local Authority area, the North East and England during each academic year since inception.
	
		
			  Take-up of EMA in each academic year 
			   South Tyneside  North East  England 
			 2004/05 1,636 19,409 297,259 
			 2005/06 1,711 25,755 429,627 
			 2006/07(1) 1,924 29,246 481,769 
			 (1) To end December. 
		
	
	Since national roll-out in September 2004, each weekly allowance payment has been £10, £20 or £30 depending on the income of the household where the recipient resides. Total expenditure is shown in the following table.
	
		
			  EMA expenditure in each financial year (national scheme) 
			  £ million 
			   Full costs (including admin costs) 
			 2004/05 260 
			 2005/06 406.6 
			 2006/07(1) 300.6 
			 (1) To end December. 
		
	
	I hope you find this information useful. If you would like further details please contact Shubana Nawaz at the LSC National Office on 0114 2074534 or shubana.nawaz@lsc.gov.uk.

Educational Attainment

Chris Ruane: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what the educational attainment levels of  (a) Gypsy,  (b) Traveller,  (c) white British and (d) UK Irish pupils were in each of the last 10 years.

Beverley Hughes: Pupil level information was collected for the first time in 2002 which enables the Department to cross match attainment levels against pupil characteristics. However, it is only from 2003 onwards that data are available on a consistent basis using the latest ethnic group classification; and these are given in the tables.
	
		
			  Key Stage 1: England—percentage of pupils achieving Level 2 and above at Key Stage 1( 1) 
			   Gypsy/Roma  Traveller of Irish Heritage  White British  Irish 
			  2003( 2) 
			 Reading 42 28 85 84 
			 Writing 38 28 82 81 
			 Mathematics 60 52 91 91 
			  
			  2004( 3) 
			 Reading 45 31 86 85 
			 Writing 43 29 83 83 
			 Mathematics 64 50 91 91 
			  
			  2005( 4) 
			 Reading 42 32 86 86 
			 Writing 40 30 84 84 
			 Mathematics 62 52 92 92 
			 Science 61 49 91 92 
			  
			  2006( 4) 
			 Reading 40 30 86 85 
			 Writing 37 30 83 82 
			 Mathematics 60 50 91 91 
			 Science 58 49 91 90 
			 (1) Results are based on provisional data. (2) Task/test results. (3) Task/test results for non-trial schools and teacher assessment results for trial schools. (4) Teacher assessment results only. 
		
	
	
		
			  Key Stage 2: England—percentage of pupils achieving Level 4 and above at Key Stage 2( 1) 
			   Gypsy/Roma  Traveller of Irish Heritage  White British  Irish 
			  2003 
			 English 30 23 76 82 
			 Mathematics 27 19 73 78 
			 Science 48 36 88 90 
			  
			  2004 
			 English 30 23 78 82 
			 Mathematics 25 23 75 78 
			 Science 45 38 87 88 
			  
			  2005 
			 English 37 26 80 84 
			 Mathematics 33 26 76 80 
			 Science 53 39 88 89 
			  
			  2006 
			 English 35 27 80 82 
			 Mathematics 32 29 77 80 
			 Science 50 42 88 89 
			 (1) Results for 2003 to 2005 are based on revised data. Results for 2006 are based on provisional data. 
		
	
	
		
			  Key Stage 3: England—percentage of pupils achieving Level 5 and above at Key Stage 3( 1) 
			   Gypsy/Roma  Traveller of Irish Heritage  White British  Irish 
			  2003 
			 English 33 49 70 75 
			 Mathematics 35 49 72 75 
			 Science 35 45 70 73 
			  
			  2004 
			 English 19 26 72 76 
			 Mathematics 23 24 74 76 
			 Science 17 23 68 70 
			  
			  2005 
			 English 29 23 75 77 
			 Mathematics 27 22 75 74 
			 Science 23 18 71 71 
			  
			  2006 
			 English n/a n/a n/a n/a 
			 Mathematics n/a n/a n/a n/a 
			 Science n/a n/a n/a n/a 
			 n/a = not available. 2006 results for Key Stage 3 are currently not available as these data work to a different time scale to the other Key Stages. Provisional Key Stage 3 attainment by pupil characteristics will be published in our Statistical First Release on 15 February 2007. (1) Results for 2003 to 2005 are based on revised data. 
		
	
	
		
			  GCSE and equivalent achievements: England—percentage of pupils achieving 5 or more A*-C grades at GCSE( 1) 
			   Gypsy/Roma  Traveller of Irish Heritage  White British  Irish 
			 2003(2) 23.2 41.6 51.3 60.1 
			 2004(2, 3) 13.5 30.2 52.3 58.3 
			 2005(3, 4) 14.7 22.5 55.0 62.6 
			 2006(3, 4) 9.9 19.0 57.2 60.8 
			 (1) Results for 2003 to 2005 are based on revised data. Results for 2006 are based on provisional data. (2) Number of pupils aged 15 at the start of the academic year. (3) Includes GCSE and equivalent achievements.3 (4) Number of pupils on roll at the end of Key Stage 4 in each academic year.

English for Speakers of Other Languages

Karen Buck: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what evidence he took into account when establishing the new English for speakers of other languages (ESOL) for work/job-focused ESOL qualification requirements.

Phil Hope: The evidence taken into account in this situation came predominantly from the levels of activity in the Further Education (FE) sector as recorded through the Learning and Skills Councils (LSC's) Individualised Learner Record (ILR). ESOL provision in England is growing at an unsustainable level and there are waiting lists for courses in most key regions, particularly in London. Although it is not possible to have wholly disaggregated information beyond getting a view of the total levels, it is clear that something needs to be done to ensure that we prioritise provision on those who most need it.
	As a result a range of measures have been introduced including new ESOL for Work qualifications. These will be shorter, simpler and more work focused, to better meet the needs of employers and those who need English for the workplace.

English for Speakers of Other Languages

Karen Buck: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills in what way existing English for speakers of other languages (ESOL) qualifications do not meet the proposed ESOL for work/job-focused ESOL criteria.

Phil Hope: There are two categories of ESOL qualifications presently available; ESOL Skills for Life and ESOL International.
	ESOL Skills for Life qualifications were designed to meet the needs of those people who are resident, or at least on long term stays in this country. On that basis they are comprehensive in nature, covering the broad range of skills and cultural contexts, and often delivered through quite long courses. They do not best meet the needs of those people wishing to acquire language skills for the specific purpose of getting a job, either in terms of the way they are delivered and their content. It these qualifications provide verification that learners have evenly balanced skills in each of the main skill areas of reading, writing, speaking and listening, the work environment may not require all of these skills to be present at the same levels.
	ESOL International qualifications have been developed by Awarding Bodies, predominantly, to meet the needs of an international market with a more academic focus. It is recognised that these make a significant contribution to the economy but this is a fee paying market and the qualifications are geared to this. These qualifications tend to be graded, have the same assumptions about the balance of skills as their Skills for Life cousins and carry quite heavy assessment burdens.
	The new ESOL for Work qualifications will better provide for the needs of those people and employers requiring language purely for employment purposes by providing an easy to understand pass/fail qualification with slimmed down assessment processes, but most importantly recognising achievement of a balance of skills at the range of levels necessary for work. For instance, it may be that reading, speaking and listening are required at a higher level than writing.

English for Speakers of Other Languages

Karen Buck: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what plans he has to improve provision and quality of English for speakers of other languages teaching.

Phil Hope: The quality of provision of English for Speakers of Other Languages (ESOL) is critically important to their chances of success and progression. The Quality Improvement Agency (QIA) has a clear remit to improve the quality of all Skills for Life through the Skills for Life Improvement Programme and its related projects which are being funded for the 2007/08 period with over £16 million. The Qualifications and Curriculum Authority has also been asked to work with Awarding Bodies to extend the range of qualifications presently on offer to include a new ESOL for Work qualification. The combination of these actions should work to improve quality and extend provision by ensuring that there are qualifications which meet the needs of employers.
	The new ESOL for Work qualifications will better provide for the needs of those people and employers requiring language purely for employment purposes by providing an easy to understand pass/fail qualification with slimmed down assessment processes. Most importantly these qualifications will recognise achievement of a balance of skills across the range of levels necessary for work. For instance, it may be that reading, speaking and listening are required at a higher level than writing.
	Importantly the opportunity has been taken to strengthen connections between the quality of ESOL teaching and the requirement of ESOL qualifications. These reforms will be implemented from September 2007.
	The breadth of provision and quality are key aims and although significant improvements have been made since the launch of Skills for Life in 2001, the drive for excellence will continue to be supported.

Learning Disabilities

Bob Spink: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills how many schoolchildren in Essex have learning disabilities; and what percentage of such children are taught in mainstream schools.

Parmjit Dhanda: The Department for Education and Skills collects information on children with special educational needs (SEN). A child has SEN if he has a significant greater difficulty in learning than the majority of children of his age, and/or he has a disability which either prevents or hinders him from making use of educational facilities generally provided for children of his age within his local authority area.
	The following table shows numbers of pupils with SEN in the Essex local authority.
	
		
			  Mainstream schools: Number and percentage of pupils with SEN( 1) —January 2006—Essex local authority 
			Pupils with statements of SEN  Pupils with SEN without statment( 2) 
			   Total pupils  Number  Percentage  Number  Percentage 
			 Total all schools 212,090 5,039 2.4 28,456 13.4 
			  of which taught in:  
			 Maintained nursery 295 (3)— (3)— 30 10.2 
			 Maintained primary(4) 107,092 1,524 1.4 16,004 14.9 
			 Maintained secondary(4) 91,095 1,471 1.6 11,117 12.2 
			   
			 Total mainstream 198,482 2,995 1.5 27,151 13.7 
			 (1) Excludes dually registered pupils. (2) Schools provide support to children with SEN taking account of the advice in the SEN code of practice which recommends school based support at two levels—"School Action" and "School Action Plus". Where a child does not make adequate progress with the support provided at "School Action Plus", the local authority may assess the child and issue a statement of the child's special educational needs. (3) Less than 3, or a rate based on less than 3. (4) Includes middle schools as deemed.  Source: Schools' Census

Parliamentary Questions

Norman Baker: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills how many parliamentary questions were tabled to his Department in 2006, broken down by  (a) ordinary written and  (b) named day; what percentage of ordinary written questions were answered within 10 working days; and what percentage of named day questions were answered by the specific date.

Parmjit Dhanda: The Department received 5,007 questions, out of which 3,826 were ordinary written and 791 were named day.
	The Department's PQ tracking system is however unable to break down the other data requested and to do so would incur disproportionate cost. This Department aims to ensure that Members receive a substantive response to their named day question on the named day, and endeavours to answer ordinary written questions within a working week of being tabled. Unfortunately, this is not always possible but this Department makes every effort to achieve these timescales.

Runaways

Annette Brooke: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what recent estimate he has made of the numbers of children who are classified as runaways.

Parmjit Dhanda: In 2002 the Social Exclusion Unit's report estimated the number at around 77,000 in the UK, of whom around 65,000 were in England. The Children's Society, a leading voluntary sector body on runaways issues, estimated in 2005 that these numbers have remained stable since 1999. We are currently working closely with The Children's Society to assess how far local authority services for young people provide an effective response to runaways.

Special Educational Needs

David Willetts: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills how many students there were with  (a) special educational needs which were statemented at school and  (b) unstatemented special educational needs who did not complete courses in further education colleges in each year from 1997 to 2006, broken down by local authority.

Parmjit Dhanda: To answer the question with a degree of accuracy requires a combination of information from the pupil data submitted to the DfES by schools and the learner data that is submitted to the LSC by FE colleges. The two datasets have not been combined for all adult learners to match the learner information together, so an analysis of retention rates in further education provision based on post-16 pupils' special educational needs (SEN) status during their time in compulsory education is not possible.
	However, learner self-assessment of whether they have learning difficulty, disability and/or health problem is recorded on the LSC's learner data. In 2004-05 the national success rate for these learners was 73 per cent., compared to 74 per cent. for those without learning difficulty, disability and/or health problem.
	In the future it will be possible for information about the SEN status of pupils in schools to be matched to information about individuals in the FE sector as the education and training sector adopts Unique Learner Numbers (ULNs) as part of the portfolio of work within the Managing Information Across Partners (MIAP) programme. This will enable the progress of learners with SEN to be monitored in terms of the schools local authority legal definition, enabling local areas to understand better how they are supporting their local communities and what changes they may need to make to improve services.

Special Educational Needs

Nick Gibb: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills 
	(1)  what assessment he has made of the practicability of level P(i) for science for children with severe and multiple disabilities;
	(2)  what assessment he has made of the evidence base underlying P level assessments for special schools.

Parmjit Dhanda: The P scales are for pupils with special educational needs (SEN) working below level 1 of the National Curriculum. For children working at levels P1 to P3, we would expect teachers to assess the type and range of performance that a child working at this level might demonstrate across a range of subjects. The guidance issued by my Department, "Supporting the target setting process", provides the same descriptors of performance across all subjects at P levels 1 to 3, with some subject specific examples to help teachers with assessment.
	The P scales were first published to assist schools in setting targets for pupils with special educational needs (SEN) and were further developed following a review in 2003. The review sought the views of a range of respondents including staff in mainstream and special schools, Ofsted inspectors and members of Her Majesty's Inspectorate. There was endorsement for the use of P scales in all settings and for the collection of national data.

Bermuda

Andrew MacKinlay: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what initiatives the government of Bermuda has taken consequent on the report she received from Colonel Baxter of the British Defence Staff, Washington DC into the Bermuda Regiment's Fitness for Role Inspection dated 29 November 2005; and if she will make a statement.

Geoff Hoon: The Governor has invited the Defence Board to take forward the recommendations made in the report.

Departmental Fixed Assets

Mark Francois: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs which fixed assets her Department sold for more than £10,000 in  (a) 2004-05 and  (b) 2005-06; and what the (i) sale value, (ii) purchaser and (iii) date of sale was of each asset.

Geoff Hoon: The details of property assets disposals for 2004-05, and property and vehicle disposals for 2005-06, are contained in the following tables. Where applicable figures have been rounded to the nearest £000. Each property was sold individually, with the majority purchased by private individuals. Details on the purchaser can be provided only at disproportionate cost. The information for vehicles sold in 2004-05 has been archived following the conclusion of the 2005-06 audit, and can be provided only at disproportionate cost.
	
		
			  Property disposal 2004-05 
			  Date of sale  Post  Type of Asset  Gross sales receipt (£) 
			 21 April 2004 Budapest Residential 139,000 
			 29 April 2004 The Hague Residential 154,000 
			 7 May 2004 Budapest Residential 155,000 
			 7 May 2004 Port Louis Residential 77,000 
			 18 May 2004 San Salvador Office 940,000 
			 30 June 2004 Tunis Site 1,076,000 
			 5 July 2004 Santiago Residential 424,000 
			 9 July 2004 Santiago Residential 46,000 
			 15 July 2004 Buenos Aires Residential 107,000 
			 19 July 2004 Buenos Aires Residential 370,000 
			 28 July 2004 Canberra Residential 856,000 
			 28 July 2004 Kuala Lumpur Residential 203,000 
			 29 July2004 Budapest Residential 4,000 
			 3 August 2004 Bucharest Residential 1,059,000 
			 22 September 2004 Kampala Site 14,000 
			 12 October 2004 Kiev Residential 69,000 
			 21 October 2004 Vienna Residential 807,000 
			 29 October 2004 Tashkent Residential 19,000 
			 11 Nov ember 2004 Dublin Residential 524,000 
			 15 November 2004 Tel Aviv Residential 725,000 
			 8 December 2004 Lusaka Office 223,000 
			 10 December 2004 Caracas Office 763,000 
			 13 December 2004 San Salvador Residence 215,000 
			 15 December 2004 Pretoria Residential 69,000 
			 17 December 2004 Lusaka Residential 120,000 
			 30 December 2004 Beirut Amenity 373,000 
			 4 January 2005 Copenhagen Residential 661,000 
			 6 January 2005 Wellington Residential 128,000 
			 23 March 2005 St. Georges Residence 254,000 
		
	
	
		
			  Property disposal 2005-06 
			  Date of sale  Post  Type of asset  Gross sales receipt (£) 
			 30 May 2005 Brisbane Residential 160,000 
			 8 June 2005 Helsinki Residential 208,000 
			 20 June 2005 Bratislava Residential 383,000 
			 29 September 2005 Lisbon Residential 800,000 
			 11 November 2005 Antananarivo Residence 265,000 
			 11 November 2005 Auckland Consulate-General (CG) Residence 659,000 
			 23 November 2005 Brussels Residential 477,000 
			 16 December 2005 Dublin Residential 905,000 
			 23 December 2005 Brisbane CG Residence 376,000 
			 4 January 2006 Perth Residential 490,000 
			 10 January 2006 Stockholm Residential 474,000 
			 13 January 2006 Port Vila Residential 175,000 
			 13 January 2006 Port Vila Residential 255,000 
			 20 January 2006 Helsinki Residential 234,000 
			 24 January 2006 Asuncion Residence 187,000 
			 25 January 2006 Dublin Residential 1,079,000 
			 31 January 2006 London Site 8,125,000 
			 21 February 2006 Santiago Residential 731,000 
			 22 February 2006 Nuku'alofa Compound (incl. Residence and Office) 29,000 
			 15 March 2006 Lima Office 56,000 
			 29 March 2006 Perth Residence 676,000 
			 29 March 2006 Tel Aviv Residential (1)885,000 
			 30 March 2006 Istanbul Compound 286,000 
			 (1) Figure represents 60 per cent. deposit received—the balance is due in financial year 2006-07. 
		
	
	
		
			  Vehicle disposals 2005-06( 1) 
			  Date of sale  Post  Type of asset  Gross sales receipt (£) 
			 30 April 2005 Madrid Jaguar Xj8 12,034.75 
			 31 July 2005 Brasilia Discovery V8i 12,923.32 
			 31 July 2005 Abidjan Jaguar F 10,292.58 
			 31 October 2005 Harare Jaguar S 17,351.47 
			 31 October 2005 Seoul Daimler V8 13,816.64 
			 31 October 2005 Harare Toyota Prado 12,724.41 
			 31 October 2005 Yaounde Freelander 12,134.83 
			 31 October 2005 Accra Range Rover 12,058.82 
			 1 January 2006 Brisbane Jaguar Sovereign 25,920.82 
			 1 January 2006 Port Vila Toyota Prado 17,000.67 
			 1 January 2006 Asuncion Range Rover 15,901.84 
			 1 January 2006 Kingston Discovery 11,334.89 
			 1 February 2006 Asuncion Discovery 13,263.16 
			 (1) The date of sale and the identity of the purchaser are not held centrally, the dates given in the table are the dates the transactions were registered on the fixed assets register.

Overseas Territories: Police Inspections

Andrew MacKinlay: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs when each police force in each Overseas Territory was subject to inspection by Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Constabulary in the past 10 years; what the level of inspection was in each case; and if she will place in the Library copies of each report.

Geoff Hoon: Although there is no statutory requirement for Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Constabulary (HMIC) to undertake inspections of Overseas Territories' Police Forces, as they are non-Home Office forces, during the last ten years HMIC has undertaken inspections in Gibraltar (full inspections in 2002 and 2003 followed by Baseline Assessments in 2005 and 2006), Bermuda (full inspection in 2003), the Cayman Islands (full inspection in 2002) and the Sovereign Base Areas of Cyprus (full inspections in 1997 and 2001 and Baseline Assessment in 2005). As these inspections were by invitation of the Governor and Overseas Territory government concerned, the reports were not published by HMIC, although some have been published locally.
	We will consult with Territory governments about placing copies of the locally published reports in the Library of the House.

Overseas Territories: Regiments

Andrew MacKinlay: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what criteria are used to determine the  (a) pay structure and  (b) revisions to the pay structure of soldiers in (i) the Royal Gibraltar Regiment, (ii) the Royal Bermuda Regiment and (iii) military units of other Overseas Territories; what the (A) rates of pay and (B) conditions are of (1) soldiers in those regiments and (2) soldiers in the UK armed forces at equivalent ranks; and if she will make a statement.

Geoff Hoon: Pay rates for UK service personnel are recommended by the independent Armed Forces' Pay Review Body (AFPRB), which reports annually to my right hon. Friends the Prime Minister and the Defence Secretary. The AFPRB bases its recommendations on broad comparability with the pay of civilian occupations of similar job weight and responsibility within the UK. To this basic pay is then added an additional element called the 'X-factor' (currently 13 per cent. of basic pay). This adjustment to military pay is recommended by the AFPRB in recognition of the differences between conditions of service experienced by members of the UK armed forces over a full career and conditions in UK civilian life, which cannot be taken directly into account in assessing pay comparability. The 'X-factor' is paid to service personnel (up to the rank of Lieutenant Colonel and equivalent at the mid pay point, beyond which it tapers) throughout their service careers—regardless of where they are serving and is pensionable.
	The 13 per cent. X-factor is for regular personnel and some reservists, particularly those who are mobilised. The majority of reservists, however, receive 5 per cent. or 0 per cent. X-factor reflecting the different levels of commitment from those of regular personnel.
	All UK service personnel are on Pay 2000, an incremental structure designed to recognise performance, length of service, and qualifications. In the case of other ranks there are two pay spines—higher and lower—and personnel are allocated to them according to their trade and rank.
	Basic pay is part of a wider remuneration package payable to service personnel which includes specialist pay e.g. flying pay or parachute pay, to recruit and retain personnel in specific branches or arms within the services. Various allowances are also payable, such as a separation allowance, to compensate personnel for time away from their permanent base and separation from their families.
	Members of the Royal Gibraltar Regiment (RGR) are on the same pay structure as UK regular forces, but with a lower level of X-factor, 5 per cent., to reflect their different level of commitment. RGR reservists receive an X-factor of 2.5 per cent. Where members of the RGR volunteer for service with UK regular forces, however, they receive the same remuneration package as their UK counterparts. Pay rates for the Regiment are adjusted annually by the Ministry of Defence in accordance with the increases recommended by the AFPRB. The RGR is paid for by the UK Government.
	The criteria used to determine the pay structure and revisions to the pay structure, and the conditions of service for the Bermuda Regiment, and the Falkland Islands Defence Force are a matter for the Governments of those Overseas Territories in accordance with their delegated responsibilities. They are not funded by the Government.
	The Overseas Territories' military units exist primarily for local defence, whereas the UK armed forces have an expectation of worldwide service. The respective conditions of service of these organisations will therefore be tailored accordingly.
	As the information requested on pay scales is lengthy, it has been placed in the Library of the House.

Serbia

Daniel Kawczynski: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what discussions she has had with her EU counterparts on the elections in Serbia and their implications for the process leading to Serbia's possible accession to the EU.

Geoff Hoon: Foreign Ministers discussed the 21 January Serbian elections at the General Affairs and External Relations Council (GAERC) meeting on 22 January in Brussels The Council welcomed the peaceful and orderly conduct of the elections and took note of the preliminary election results which indicated a clear majority for reform orientated political parties.
	My right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary and I regularly discuss Serbia's EU perspective with EU counterparts. The January GAERC called for the speedy formation of a government committed to Serbia's European course and prepared to tackle the challenges ahead in a spirit of constructive co-operation with the international community. As underlined by the December 2006 European Council, Serbia needs to accelerate efforts to meet the necessary conditions, notably full co-operation with International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia.

Venezuela

Geoffrey Clifton-Brown: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs whether her Department has made an assessment of the possible effect on freedom of the press in Venezuela of the decision of the Venezuelan Government not to renew broadcast licenses for television stations.

Geoff Hoon: It is important that decisions of this kind follow established procedure and clear legal guidelines and do not unlawfully impinge on the independent media's right to express their opinions freely. The legal position surrounding the Venezuelan Government's stated decision not to renew the licence of Radio Caracas Television is unclear, but widespread concerns have been expressed about its impact on the media's future scope to operate free from Government pressure or censorship. We hope that the Venezuelan Government will work to ensure that press freedom is fully protected.

"The Commercial Use of Public Information"

Mark Todd: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a statement on his Department's response to the Office of Fair Trading's report "The Commercial Use of Public Information".

Adam Ingram: The Ministry of Defence (MOD) does not intend to submit a formal response to the Office of Fair Trading's report, 'The Commercial Use of Public Information'. However MOD have been assisting the Department of Trade and Industry who will be providing the Government response to the report.

Afghanistan

Ann Winterton: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what the rules of engagement in Afghanistan are for retaliation by the armed forces against mortar and rocket attack.

Des Browne: Rules of Engagement detail the levels of permissiveness for the application of force in all environments across a wide range of activities that our forces may be employed. Profiles do not constrain the inherent right of self-defence, and neither do they provide detailed tactical instructions to commanders.
	Our Rules of Engagement entitle our forces to take reasonable and necessary action in self defence in response to mortar and rocket attack. The Commander in situ would use his military judgment to determine what would be the most appropriate means to counter the attack at the time.
	In order to safe-guard the security of our armed forces on operations, it is MOD policy not to comment on specific operational profiles or the rules therein.

Biodiesel

Willie Rennie: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how much biodiesel was used by his Department in the last period for which figures are available; and at what cost.

Adam Ingram: holding answer 30 January 2007
	All diesel fuel purchased by the Ministry of Defence (MOD) for use in military vehicles and equipment may contain up to 5 per cent. bio-fuel, in accordance with EU Directive 2003717/EEC. Fuels are obtained in numerous consignments from a wide variety of sources and locations and there is no requirement for MOD to record exactly what proportion of bio-fuel each supplier uses. The cost of bio-fuels is therefore not available.

Civilian Prisoners: Compensation

Austin Mitchell: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence for what reasons he decided to apply a 20 year rule for connection with the UK on his scheme for compensation of British civilians of the Japanese.

Adam Ingram: I refer my hon. Friend to the answer given on 24 January 2007,  Official Report, column 1775W, by my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary of State for Defence (Derek Twigg).

Cluster Munitions

Michael Moore: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what progress the Government has made in phasing out its stockpiles of dumb cluster munitions; and if he will make a statement.

Adam Ingram: Next month we expect to place a contract to enable disposal of 50 per cent. of the Multiple Launch Rocket System M26 stockpile over the next three years. It is envisaged that this munition will be removed completely by 2013 as new capabilities are introduced. A contract for the disposal of a significant quantity of the remaining BL755 and RBL755 cluster bombs was placed on 22 January 2007. Similarly, it is envisaged that these munitions will be completely phased out by the end of 2010, as the new capabilities are introduced.

Correspondence

Mark Harper: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence when he will write to the hon. Member for Forest of Dean as promised in the answers of  (a) 2 November 2006,  Official Report, columns 641-42W, on naval longevity tables,  (b) 1 November 2006,  Official Report, column 432W, on trained strength outflow,  (c) 1 November 2006,  Official Report, column 431W, on resettlement provision and  (d) 24 October 2006,  Official Report, column 1730W, on departmental accounts.

Derek Twigg: My hon. Friend the Under-Secretary of State wrote to the hon. Member on 16 January 2007 about trained strength outflow and resettlement provision. I wrote to the hon. Member on 18 January about naval longevity tables and on 29 January about departmental accounts. Copies of all letters were placed in the Library of the House.

Defence Budget

Brian Jenkins: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what the defence budget was for each year between 1987 and 2007.

Adam Ingram: Since 1998, defence spending plans have been set as part of a Government's Spending Review process. Prior to this, spending plans were set on an annual basis. The defence budget, drawn from the outcome of these reviews, is set out as follows.
	
		
			   Defence budget (£ billion) 
			 1986-87 18.5 
			 1987-88 18.8 
			 1988-89 19.2 
			 1989-90 20.1 
			 1990-91 21.2 
			 1991-92 22.8 
			 1992-93 24.2 
			 1993-94 23.5 
			 1994-95 23.5 
			 1995-96 21.7 
			 1996-97 21.4 
			 1997-98 21.8 
			 1998-99 22.2 
			 1999-2000 22.3 
			 2000-01 23.0 
			 2001-02 23.6 
			 2002-03 29.3 
			 2003-04 30.9 
			 2004-05 29.7 
			 2005-06 30.9 
			 2006-07 32.1 
			 2007-08 33.5 
		
	
	The Government accounting process has changed progressively over this period due to the introduction of Resource Accounting and Budgeting. The terms in which these budgets were set are therefore not directly comparable.

Departmental Staff

Mike Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence which  (a) independent and  (b) maintained educational institutions accommodate pupils and students receiving the boarding school allowance granted to employees of his Department; how many pupils at each institution received the allowance in each of the last three years for which figures are available and at what cost; and if he will make a statement.

Derek Twigg: The information requested is as follows:
	 Children of service personnel
	The children of service personnel who benefit from service education allowances attend a considerable number of educational establishments. A list of those educational establishments that accommodated children of service personnel in receipt of education allowances in academic years 2005-06 and 2006-07 has been placed in the Library of the House. The figures were completed as at the spring term for both of these years. The Department does not have these details for 2004-05.
	The cost of education allowances in the past three years is as follows:
	
		
			   £ million 
			 2003-04 86.4 
			 2004-05 90.7 
			 2005-06 93.6 
		
	
	The estimated cost for 2006-07 is £100 million.
	The Ministry of Defence records the number of service claimants, the number of children benefiting from service education allowances and the educational establishments they attend. The Department does not have figures that identify the cumulative value of service education allowances which, via service claimants, benefit each individual educational establishment. Also, the number of service children benefiting from education allowances does not indicate the number of service claimants, as one service parent might claim for one or more children.
	 Children of civil service personnel
	Eligible Ministry of Defence civil servants can claim a tax free schooling allowance for children attending fee paying schools overseas or at independent schools in the UK. The annual cost in the UK for 2005-06 is around £1.1 million. However, as claims for the allowance overseas are reimbursed by local budgets, there is no central record of such costs and the total figure could be provided only at disproportionate cost.
	Like the services, the number of children of civil servants benefiting from schooling allowances does not indicate the number of civil servant claimants, as one parent may claim for one or more children. The figure is estimated to be in the region of 100 children.

Firearms: Theft

Philip Davies: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many firearms were stolen from the armed forces in each of the last 10 years; what the value was of the firearms stolen; and what measures were taken to recover them.

Adam Ingram: The totals of firearms recorded as stolen from the armed forces in each of the last 10 years are given in the table. The data covers firearms stolen on a global basis, including operational theatres overseas, and private firearms lodged in MOD armouries. The total value of the stolen firearms could be provided only at disproportionate cost. The theft of any firearm is taken very seriously and is fully investigated by the police. The police undertaking the investigation may, depending on the circumstances of the theft, be the Service police, Ministry of Defence police or a Home Department police force, often working jointly. While there has been a total of 169 firearms stolen over the period 1997-2006, 39 of these have been recovered.
	
		
			   Number of firearms stolen 
			 1997 8 
			 1998 15 
			 1999 14 
			 2000 52 
			 2001 8 
			 2002 22 
			 2003 4 
			 2004 28 
			 2005 25 
			 2006 13 
			 Total 169

Future Carrier Project

Michael Ancram: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what the status is of the Future Carrier joint-venture project with the French Government; how much money has been spent by each Government on the project; whether progress has been made in line with expected time frames; what the expected in-service date is for the first carrier; and if he will make a statement.

Adam Ingram: holding answer 30 January 2007
	I refer the right hon. Member to the reply I gave on 6 February 2006,  Official Report, column 824W, to the hon. Member for Wellingborough (Mr. Bone), which explains the financial contribution made by France.
	Up to 31 December 2006, the UK has spent £411 million on the Future Aircraft Carrier (CVF) Project. This comprises of £4 million on the concept phase, £300 million on the assessment phase and £107 million on the demonstration phase.
	This work has produced a Common Baseline Design that both UK and France can use to develop and build their own carriers. Our co-operation with France will bring savings in design costs, and offers the potential of savings on manufacture and support. It will be up to UK and French industry to make the most of the opportunities provided by this commonality during the next phase of the respective programmes.
	Good progress is being made on the CVF demonstration phase work, which is aimed at maturing the risks, costs and the contractual framework for building the carriers. The culmination of this work will enable us to agree a robust, affordable deal and take a decision to commit to manufacture. It is at this stage that the in-service dates will be announced.

Iraq

Sarah Teather: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many  (a) 16,  (b) 17 and  (c) 18-year-olds have served in Iraq, broken down by gender.

Adam Ingram: Data on the age and sex of service personnel deployed on operations are not held centrally.
	Provisional estimates collated from manual records show that no 16-year-old and fifteen 17-year-old personnel have been deployed to Iraq since the 'Optional Protocol to the Convention on the rights of the child on the involvement of children in armed conflict' was ratified on 24 June 2003. None have been deployed since July 2005.
	Fewer than five of the 17-year-old personnel deployed were female.
	The vast majority of those that were deployed were within one week of their 18(th) birthdays or were removed from theatre within a week of their arrival. Fewer than five 17-year-olds were deployed for a period of greater than three weeks.
	New administrative guidelines and procedures have been introduced by each of the Services following the ratification of the Optional Protocol to ensure that under 18-year-old personnel are not deployed to areas where hostilities are taking place unless there is a clear operational requirement for them to do so. Unfortunately, these processes are not infallible and the pressures on units prior to deployment have meant that there have been a small number of instances where soldiers have been inadvertently deployed to Iraq before their 18(th) birthday, as described above.
	Figures on those aged 18 could be provided only at disproportionate cost.
	All numbers are rounded to the nearest five.

Joint Strike Fighter

Gerald Howarth: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will list those critical British technologies whose transfer to the United States have been authorised by the Government in connection with the Joint Strike Fighter.

Adam Ingram: holding answer 18 December 2006
	We have agreed the release of the technologies necessary to ensure the success of this collaborative programme. This includes technology in the fields of take-off and landing, flight control, engine and lift fan, ejection seat, simulators and weapon systems.

Military Equipment: Imports

Jim Cousins: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what the value of imports of military defence and security-related equipment to the UK has been over the last five years, broken down by country.

Adam Ingram: I will place a copy of the data giving the value of imports of defence equipment broken down by country, for the last five years, in the Library of the House. This data is consistent with that published by the Defence Analytical Services Agency in Table 1.11 of UK Defence Statistics 2006, a copy of which is available in the Library of the House.
	Data is based on HM Revenue and Customs information relating to defence equipment reported to UK Customs. Defence equipment is identified by an agreed set of tariff codes intended to capture the movement of military equipment.

Porton Down

Mike Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what the nature is of the biological research  (a) being undertaken and  (b) planned to be undertaken at Porton Down; and if he will make a statement.

Adam Ingram: The Chemical, Biological, Radiological and Nuclear (CBRN) defence research being conducted by the Defence Science and Technology Laboratory (Dstl) at Porton Down is directed towards helping the UK achieve its policy aim of maintaining political and military freedom of action, despite the presence, threat or use of CBRN weapons.
	The current nature of the biological research is summarised under the headings of Hazard Assessment, Detection and Diagnostics, and Medical Counter-measures in the UK annual Confidence Building Measures returns to the United Nations. These returns are submitted by the UK in accordance with the Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention.
	The returns for 2003 to 2005 can be found on the Foreign and Commonwealth Office website at:
	http://www.fco.gov.uk/servlet/Front?pagename=OpenMarket/Xcelerate/ShowPage&c=Page&cid=1065432161527.
	The return for 2006 is currently being collated for submission to the UN in April will be available on the website in due course.
	Future directions in CBRN research are set out in the recently published Defence Technology Strategy which can be found on the Ministry of Defence website at:
	http://www.mod.uk/DefenceInternet/DefenceNews/DefencePolicyAndBusiness/LordDraysonLaunchesDefenceTechnologyStrategy.htm.
	Copies are also available in the Library of the House.

Recruitment

Ann Winterton: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what percentage of recruits for  (a) the Royal Navy,  (b) the Army and  (c) the Royal Air Force passed their basic training to become operationally available in each of the last five years.

Adam Ingram: The following tables provide the percentages of untrained strength who became trained and those still in training, in each of the last five financial years (2001-02 to 2005-06), by service.
	Percentages are based on the number of Service Personnel who joined the untrained strength during each of the financial years, then subsequently became trained/commissioned at any date up to 31 March 2006 or who are currently still on the untrained strength at 31 March 2006.
	
		
			  Naval service—intake for financial years 2001-02 to 2005-06 
			   Percentage of officers who:  Percentage of other ranks who: 
			   Became trained  Are still on untrained strength  Became trained  Are still on untrained strength 
			 2001-02 76 6 60 2 
			 2002-03 69 12 61 4 
			 2003-04 57 27 62 7 
			 2004-05 31 53 61 9 
			 2005-06 13 78 41 32 
			  Note:  Naval Service comprises Royal Navy and Royal Marines. 
		
	
	
		
			  Army—intake for financial years 2001-02 to 2005-06 
			   Percentage of officers who:  Percentage of other ranks who: 
			   Became trained  Are still on untrained strength  Became trained  Are still on untrained strength 
			 2001-02 83 1 72 0 
			 2002-03 77 7 70 0 
			 2003-04 76 9 69 1 
			 2004-05 87 1 62 5 
			 2005-06 51 38 36 34 
		
	
	
		
			  Royal Air Force-intake for financial years 2001-02 to 2005-06 
			   Percentage of officers who:  Percentage of other ranks who: 
			   Became trained  Are still on untrained strength  Became trained  Are still on untrained strength 
			 2001-02 81 11 85 0 
			 2002-03 68 22 86 0 
			 2003-04 55 37 82 2 
			 2004-05 41 55 74 9 
			 2005-06 8 89 17 70

Service Accommodation

Mark Harper: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many  (a) service family accommodation and  (b) single living accommodation properties in the United Kingdom are (i) standard 1, (ii) standard 2, (iii) standard 3 and (iv) standard 4.

Adam Ingram: There are 49,022 SFA in the UK. Of these 2,191 have been identified as no longer required by the Ministry of Defence and will be disposed of in due course. The remainder (46,831) is in the following table:
	
		
			  Service Families Accommodation (SFA). 
			  Standard for Condition  Number SFA  Percentage SFA 
			 1 27,687 59 
			 2 16,916 36 
			 3 2,089 4 
			 4 139 1 
		
	
	As at November 2006 there are 137,282 SLA in the UK. The delivery of SLA within the UK is undertaken through a number of contractual arrangements and is assessed by 'Grade for Charge' rather than 'Standard for Condition'. 'Grade for Charge' does take into account the condition of the SLA, but also includes scale, environment and the location of SLA as part of its assessment. The 'Grade for Charge' for SLA is in the following table.
	
		
			  Single Living Accommodation (SLA) 
			  Grade for Charge  Number SLA  Percentage SLA 
			 1 24,254 18 
			 2 23,261 17 
			 3 22,931 17 
			 4 66,836 48

Service Personnel: Housing

Shailesh Vara: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how much was spent on  (a) building and  (b) the upkeep of armed forces' housing in each year since 1996, broken down by service.

Derek Twigg: holding answer 22 January 2007
	The following table gives the expenditure on Service Families Accommodation housing in Great Britain in each year since 2001-02. It is not possible to provide information prior to this date or broken down by Service as this would be at disproportionate cost. Information on expenditure on housing overseas cannot be separately identified except at disproportionate cost.
	
		
			  £ million 
			   2001-02  2002-03  2003-04  2004-05  2005-06 
			  (a) New building 25.3 25.5 25.2 12.1 28.0 
			  (b) Maintenance 123.0 92.0 103.0 91.6 109.2

Community Support Officers

Lindsay Hoyle: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many community support officers (CSOs) operate within Chorley constituency; how many additional CSOs are due to be deployed within Chorley constituency during the course of 2006-07; and what funding has been provided for these additional support officers.

Tony McNulty: Chorley is part of the southern (C) division of the Lancashire constabulary.
	On 30 June 2006 the southern division had 38 police community support officers (PCSOs). Information on the number of police community support officers in basic command units is collected annually. The deployment of PCSOs to basic command units is an operational matter for the chief constable and within the southern
	division a matter for the divisional commander.
	Lancashire has a target to reach 417 PCSOs in April 2007. For 2006-07 the sum of £5.8 million has been allocated to the police authority towards the cost of Neighbourhood Policing in Lancashire. We have allocated £7.6 million in 2007-08.

Firework Regulations

Peter Soulsby: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many fines were issued for breaches of firework regulations in Leicester in  (a) 2005 and  (b) 2006.

Vernon Coaker: Data from the court proceedings database held by the Office for Criminal Justice Reform show that one person was fined under the Explosives Act 1875, Section 80 for the offence of throwing, casting or firing any fireworks in or into any highway, street, etc public place. Court proceedings data for 2006 will be available in the autumn of 2007.
	Data held by the Office for Criminal Justice Reform showing the number of PNDs issued, in England and Wales from 2005 to 2006 (January to June provisional) can be found in the following table.
	In addition, the penalty notice for disorder (PND) scheme was introduced in England and Wales in 2004. Under the scheme, the police can issue an 80 fixed penalty for a number of fireworks offences under the Explosives Act 1875 and Fireworks Act 2003. The offence of throwing fireworks in a thoroughfare (Explosives Act) came into force in August 2002: the offences of breach of the fireworks curfew, possession of category four fireworks, and possession by a person under 18 of an adult firework (Fireworks Act) were added to the PND Scheme on 11 October 2004. The following table shows the number of PNDs that were issued in the Leicestershire police force area for 2005 and for January to June 2006 (provisional); complete figures for 2006 will be available in the spring of 2007. We are unable to give the number of PNDs issued in Leicester during the above period, as data are not collected to that level of detail.
	
		
			  Number of Penalty Notices for Disorder (PND) issued for firework offences in Leicestershire police force area, 2005-06( 1) 
			   Throwing fireworks  Breach of fireworks curfew  Possession of a Category 4 firework  Possession by under 18 of adult firework 
			 2005 1 (2)— (2)— 1 
			 2006(3) (2)— (2)— (2)— (2)— 
			 Total 1 0 (2)— 1 
			 (1 )Every effort is made to ensure that the figures presented are accurate and complete. However, it is important to note that these data have been extracted from large administrative data systems generated by police forces. As a consequence care should be taken to ensure data collection processes and their inevitable limitations are taken into account when those data are used. (2 )Nil (3) Provisional —January to June 2006  Source: RDS Office for Criminal Justice Reform

Hit and Run

Christopher Fraser: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department in how many hit and run incidents where the driver was subsequently identified the driver was found to be  (a) under the influence of (i) alcohol and (ii) drugs,  (b) uninsured and  (c) unlicensed in each of the last five years.

Stephen Ladyman: I have been asked to reply.
	The number of reported hit and run personal injury road accidents police where the driver failed, or refused to provide a breath test in each of the last five years is given in the following table.
	
		
			  Accidents where a hit and run driver failed or refused to provide a breath test, GB 2001-2005 
			   Number of accidents 
			 2001 785 
			 2002 850 
			 2003 824 
			 2004 747 
			 2005 690 
		
	
	However, as 80 per cent. of hit and run drivers were not contactable at the time of the accident to provide a breath test the actual number who would have failed the test may be higher than the numbers given in the table.
	There were 140 accidents involving a hit and run driver where 'Impaired by drugs' was stated as contributory factor in 2005. Contributory factor data were not collected prior to 2005.
	The information requested on unlicensed drivers and unregistered drivers is not available.

Breast Treatment

Julia Goldsworthy: To ask the Secretary of State for Health which hospital trusts in England perform mastectomies but do not offer breast reconstruction surgery.

Rosie Winterton: Information on the treatments offered to a patient is not collected.
	However, we do collect data on where procedures are carried out. The table shows the number of mastectomies and breast reconstruction performed in England in 2005-06 broken down by national health service trust.
	The National Institute for Clinical Excellence's (NICE) guidance on "Improving Outcomes for Breast Cancer", published in August 2002, recommends that surgeons should discuss breast reconstruction with all patients.
	Implementation of NICE guidance is a developmental standard as set out in "National Standards, Local Action" published by the Department in July 2004. Progress is expected to be made against the developmental standards across much of the NHS. In 2006-07, the Healthcare Commission will assess trusts against a sample of the developmental standards including those related to clinical and cost effectiveness, which covers the breast cancer guidance. The Healthcare Commission's "Criteria for Assessing Developmental Standards in 2006-07", is available at:
	www.healthcarecommission.org.uk/_db/_documents/Criteria_for_assessing_developmental_standards_0607.pdf
	
		
			  Count of total finished consultant episodes for mastectomy and reconstruction of breast by provider—mastectomy and breast reconstruction defined as using OPCS 4.2 codes—mastectomy: B27.1, B27.2, B27.3, B27.4, B27.5, B27.8 and B27.9—reconstruction of breast: B29.1, B29.2, B29.3, B29.4, B29.5, B29.8, B29.9—possible reconstruction of breast( 1) : B30.1, S48.2 
			  NHS hospitals England 2005-06  Mastectomy  Reconstruction of breast  Possible reconstruction of breast( 1) 
			 South and East Dorset PCT (2)— (2)— 0 
			 Mid Devon PCT (2)— 0 0 
			 Royal Surrey County Hospital NHS Trust 106 8 (2)— 
			 Weston Area Health NHS Trust 56 0 0 
			 East Somerset NHS Trust 62 0 0 
			 United Bristol Healthcare NHS Trust 94 (2)— (2)— 
			 South Devon Health Care NHS Trust 98 0 (2)— 
			 Bradford Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust 207 64 18 
			 Southend Hospital NHS Trust 99 7 0 
			 Royal Free Hampstead NHS Trust 84 28 8 
			 North Middlesex University Hospital NHS Trust 51 0 0 
			 The Hillingdon Hospital NHS Trust 58 (2)— 0 
			 Kingston Hospital NHS Trust 52 (2)— 0 
			 Taunton and Somerset NHS Trust 95 0 0 
			 West Dorset General Hospitals NHS Trust 69 (2)— (2)— 
			 Walsall Hospitals NHS Trust 154 0 0 
			 Wirral Hospital NHS Trust 109 0 0 
			 St. Helens and Knowsley Hospitals NHS Trust 102 47 37 
			 Royal Liverpool Children's NHS Trust 14 0 0 
			 The Mid Cheshire Hospitals NHS Trust 99 0 0 
			 Christie Hospital NHS Trust 81 30 38 
			 Northern Devon Healthcare NHS Trust 49 0 0 
			 Bedford Hospital NHS Trust 46 (2)— 0 
			 Ealing Hospital NHS Trust 18 0 0 
			 Luton and Dunstable Hospital NHS Trust 72 (2)— 0 
			 York Hospitals NHS Trust 144 26 17 
			 Scarborough and North East Yorkshire Health Care NHS Trust 57 0 0 
			 Harrogate and District NHS Foundation Trust 35 0 0 
			 Airedale NHS Trust 52 (2)— 0 
			 Nottingham City Hospital NHS Trust 255 97 23 
			 Sheffield Children's NHS Trust 7 0 (2)— 
			 The Queen Elizabeth Hospital King's Lynn NHS Trust 89 (2)— (2)— 
			 Royal United Hospital Bath NHS Trust 130 12 (2)— 
			 Poole Hospital NHS Trust 90 (2)— (2)— 
			 Heatherwood and Wexham Park Hospitals NHS Trust 141 44 (2)— 
			 Milton Keynes General Hospital NHS Trust 58 0 0 
			 Basildon and Thurrock University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust 41 0 0 
			 Essex Rivers Healthcare NHS Trust 143 7 (2)— 
			 Finchley Park Hospital NHS Foundation Trust 102 (2)— (2)— 
			 Royal Bournemouth and Christchurch Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust 106 (2)— 0 
			 South Tyneside NHS Foundation Trust 58 0 0 
			 Royal Cornwall Hospitals NHS Trust 175 0 0 
			 Aintree Hospitals NHS Trust 89 8 (2)— 
			 Barking, Havering and Redbridge Hospitals NHS Trust 190 (2)— 0 
			 Barnsley District General Hospital NHS Foundation Trust 102 6 0 
			 Queen's Medical Centre, Nottingham University Hosp 2 0 0 
			 The Rotherham NHS Foundation Trust 74 0 0 
			 Chesterfield Royal Hospital NHS Foundation Trust 162 8 0 
			 West Middlesex University Hospital NHS Trust 34 (2)— (2)— 
			 Queen Elizabeth Hospital NHS Trust 30 0 0 
			 Bromley Hospitals NHS Trust 93 (2)— (2)— 
			 Whipps Cross University Hospital NHS Trust 72 0 0 
			 Peterborough and Stamford Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust 119 (2)— 11 
			 James Paget Healthcare NHS Trust 84 6 (2)— 
			 Ipswich Hospital NHS Trust 91 (2)— (2)— 
			 West Suffolk Hospitals NHS Trust 64 7 0 
			 Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust 184 32 20 
			 Queen Mary's Sidcup NHS Trust 31 0 0 
			 Royal Devon and Exeter NHS Foundation Trust 231 43 33 
			 Southampton University Hospitals NHS Trust 180 0 0 
			 Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust 205 79 48 
			 Portsmouth Hospitals NHS Trust 190 37 13 
			 Royal Berkshire and Battle Hospitals NHS Trust 120 (2)— (2)— 
			 Guy's and St. Thomas NHS Foundation Trust 225 38 15 
			 The Lewisham Hospital NHS Trust 3 0 0 
			 St. Mary's NHS Trust 67 (2)— (2)— 
			 Mayday Healthcare NHS Trust 71 0 0 
			 St. George's Healthcare NHS Trust 102 9 22 
			 South Warwickshire General Hospitals NHS Trust 89 14 (2)— 
			 Mid Staffordshire General Hospitals NHS Trust 84 7 (2)— 
			 University Hospital Of North Staffordshire NHS Trust 185 62 25 
			 Burton Hospitals NHS Trust 67 13 7 
			 Good Hope Hospital NHS Trust 79 6 0 
			 Northern Lincolnshire and Goole Hospitals NHS Trust 120 (2)— (2)— 
			 East Cheshire NHS Trust 96 (2)— (2)— 
			 Countess Of Chester Hospital NHS Foundation Trust 137 43 10 
			 King's College Hospital NHS Trust 46 0 0 
			 Sherwood Forest Hospitals NHS Trust 82 0 0 
			 Plymouth Hospitals NHS Trust 192 40 23 
			 University Hospitals Coventry and Warwickshire NHS 110 7 (2)— 
			 The Whittington Hospital NHS Trust 26 0 0 
			 The Royal Wolverhampton Hospitals NHS Trust 98 6 (2)— 
			 City Hospitals Sunderland NHS Foundation Trust 87 0 0 
			 Hereford Hospitals NHS Trust 61 (2)— (2)— 
			 George Eliot Hospital NHS Trust 63 22 14 
			 Norfolk and Norwich University Hospital NHS Trust 254 45 42 
			 South Manchester University Hospitals NHS Trust 215 84 60 
			 Salford Royal Hospitals NHS Trust 87 16 (2)— 
			 Trafford Healthcare NHS Trust 17 0 0 
			 Bolton Hospitals NHS Trust 152 6 9 
			 Tameside and Glossop Acute Services NHS Trust 85 0 0 
			 Winchester and Eastleigh Healthcare NHS Trust 91 16 (2)— 
			 Swindon and Marlborough NHS Trust 89 (2)— 7 
			 North Hampshire Hospitals NHS Trust 72 (2)— (2)— 
			 Dartford and Gravesham NHS Trust 57 0 0 
			 Dudley Group Of Hospitals NHS Trust 147 12 6 
			 Newham University Hospital NHS Trust 39 0 0 
			 Barts and The London NHS Trust 131 13 11 
			 North Cumbria Acute Hospitals NHS Trust 110 (2)— (2)— 
			 Kettering General Hospital NHS Trust 71 0 0 
			 Northampton General Hospital NHS Trust 85 0 0 
			 Salisbury Health Care NHS Trust 118 56 44 
			 Great Ormond Street Hospital For Children NHS Trust 1 0 0 
			 Doncaster and Bassetlaw Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust 152 8 (2)— 
			 Medway NHS Trust 94 0 0 
			 Queen Victoria Hospital NHS Foundation Trust 83 73 40 
			 Worthing and Southlands Hospitals NHS Trust 123 9 (2)— 
			 Royal West Sussex NHS Trust 45 0 0 
			 The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust 185 156 10 
			 Birmingham Children's Hospital NHS Trust 7 0 8 
			 Royal Liverpool and Broadgreen University Hospital 217 25 9 
			 Mid Essex Hospital Services NHS Trust 147 156 11 
			 Chelsea and Westminster Healthcare NHS Trust 21 (2)— 6 
			 Hammersmith Hospitals NHS Trust 166 32 18 
			 Hinchingbrooke Health Care NHS Trust 47 0 6 
			 The Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust 96 (2)— (2)— 
			 Homerton University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust 38 0 0 
			 Heart Of England NHS Foundation Trust 132 0 (2)— 
			 Isle Of Wight Healthcare NHS Trust 44 0 0 
			 Gateshead Health NHS Foundation Trust 137 17 8 
			 Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust 239 55 42 
			 Wrightington, Wigan and Leigh NHS Trust 139 11 (2)— 
			 University Hospital Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust 177 62 44 
			 University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust 55 0 (2)— 
			 The Newcastle Upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Trust 251 80 50 
			 Gloucestershire Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust 162 11 13 
			 Northumbria Health Care NHS Trust 134 22 0 
			 Derby Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust 241 9 43 
			 Oxford Radcliffe Hospitals NHS Trust 222 25 11 
			 Ashford and St. Peter's Hospitals NHS Trust 84 (2)— (2)— 
			 Surrey and Sussex Healthcare NHS Trust 103 (2)— (2)— 
			 South Tees Hospitals NHS Trust 180 32 (2)— 
			 University Hospitals Of Morecambe Bay NHS Trust 165 2 12 
			 North West London Hospitals NHS Trust 99 (2)— (2)— 
			 North Bristol NHS Trust 179 37 93 
			 Barnet and Chase Farm Hospitals NHS Trust 127 (2)— 0 
			 Epsom and St. Helier University Hospitals NHS Trust 4 0 0 
			 East Kent Hospitals NHS Trust 157 6 16 
			 North Tees and Hartlepool NHS Trust 165 19 7 
			 Southport and Ormskirk Hospital NHS Trust 45 0 0 
			 Central Manchester and Manchester Children's Uni 7 0 (2)— 
			 Pennine Acute Hospitals NHS Trust 221 13 30 
			 Hull and East Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust 186 41 35 
			 United Lincolnshire Hospitals NHS Trust 213 6 (2)— 
			 University Hospitals Of Leicester NHS Trust 298 63 28 
			 Maidstone and Tunbridge Wells NHS Trust 147 (2)— 0 
			 West Hertfordshire Hospitals NHS Trust 137 31 9 
			 East and North Hertfordshire NHS Trust 112 25 10 
			 Stockport NHS Foundation Trust 71 0 0 
			 Worcestershire Acute Hospitals NHS Trust 158 (2)— 0 
			 North Cheshire Hospitals NHS Trust 102 (2)— (2)— 
			 Calderdale and Huddersfield NHS Trust 170 0 0 
			 East Sussex Hospitals NHS Trust 173 (2)— 0 
			 Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust 171 22 14 
			 Brighton and Sussex University Hospitals NHS Trust 151 9 (2)— 
			 Sandwell and West Birmingham Hospitals NHS Trust 211 31 15 
			 Blackpool, Fylde and Wyre Hospitals NHS Trust 146 0 0 
			 Lancashire Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust 122 30 22 
			 County Durham and Darlington Acute Hospitals NHS Trust 158 31 14 
			 Buckinghamshire Hospitals NHS Trust 116 42 22 
			 East Lancashire Hospitals NHS Trust 137 (2)— (2)— 
			 Shrewsbury and Telford Hospital NHS Trust 133 (2)— (2)— 
			 Total 17,823 2,409 1,330 
			 (1) Possible reconstruction of the breast (B30.1 and S48.2) can be used to describe forms of reconstruction of the breast but can also apply to other operations on the breast.. (2) Indicates 5 or less.  Notes: 1. Data Quality: Hospital Episode Statistics (HES) are compiled from data sent by over 300 NHS Trusts and Primary Care Trusts (PCTs) in England. 2. All operations count of Episodes: these figures represent a count of all Finished Consultant Episodes where the procedure was mentioned in any of the 12 (4 prior to 2002-02) operation fields in a HES record. A record is only included once in each count, even if an operation is mentioned in more than one operation field of the record. 3. Ungrossed Data: figures have not been adjusted for shortfalls in data (i.e. the data are ungrossed.  Source: Hospital Episode Statistics (HES), The Information Centre for Health and Social Care

Dentistry

Geraldine Smith: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what improvements have been made in providing NHS dentists in Morecambe and Lunesdale in the last 12 months.

Rosie Winterton: Patients wishing to access national health service dental treatment in the Morecambe and Lunesdale area are directed to the dental access centre in Morecambe and through this route they gain access to an NHS dentist. The number of dentists in the former Morecambe Bay Primary Care Trust (PCT) area is shown in the table.
	
		
			  Numbers of dentists on an open NHS contract within the former Morecambe Bay PCT as at the specified dates 
			   Morecambe Bay PCT 
			 31 March 2005 129 
			 31 March 2006 142 
			 30 June 2006 131 
			 30 September 2006 138 
			  Notes:  1. Information as at 30 June 2006 and 30 September 2006 is based on the new NHS dental contractual arrangements between providers and PCTs, introduced on 1 April 2006. Earlier data are based on the old contractual arrangements between principal dentists and PCTs and, therefore, are not directly comparable.  2. Figures for the numbers of dentists at specified dates may vary depending on the date the figures are compiled. This is because the NHS BSA may be notified of joiners or leavers to or from the general dental services or personal dental services up to several months, or more, after the move has taken place.  Sources: The Information Centre for health and social care  NHS Business Services Authority (BSA)

Dentistry

Norman Lamb: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what estimate she has made of the number of people who  (a) regularly received NHS dental treatment,  (b) regularly received private dental treatment and  (c) were not receiving any regular dental treatment in each of the last five years.

Rosie Winterton: Information is not available on the number of patients accessing regular private treatment or the number accessing no regular dental treatment.
	Information is held on the number of patients accessing national health service dental services. Prior to April 2006 the measure used as a proxy for access was the number of patients registered with an NHS dentist. Registrations lasted 15 months. The following table shows the number of patients registered with an NHS dentist as at 31 March of the years 2002 to 2006.
	
		
			  General dental services (GDS) and personal dental services (PDS): Numbers of patients registered with an NHS dentist and as a proportion of the population in England as at 31 March each year 
			   Number of registrations  Proportion of the population (percentage) 
			 2002 24,263,174 49 
			 2003 23,905,016 48 
			 2004 24,337,674 49 
			 2005 24,127,783 48 
			 2006 24,714,417 49 
			  Notes:  1. 2005 and 2006 percentages have been estimated using Office for National Statistics 2004 mid-year population estimates based on the 2001 Census as these are the latest available.  2. PDS schemes had varying registration periods. To ensure comparability with corresponding GDS data, PDS registrations were estimated using proxy registrations, namely the number of patients seen by PDS practices in the previous 15 months. PDS proxy registrations were not estimated for periods before September 2003, actual registrations were used before this date.  3. Data for 2003 and earlier do not include those PDS schemes that did not have any registrations, such as dental access centres, and are therefore not directly comparable with later data.  4. The data for the year ending March 2006 are the final data on registrations. Under the new arrangements for primary dental care services, the measure used as a proxy for access is no longer registrations but the numbers of patients seen within the most recent 24-month period.  Sources:  The Information Centre for health and social care  NHS Business Services Authority (BSA)

Dentistry

David Taylor: To ask the Secretary of State for Health 
	(1)  how many NHS dentists there are per head of population in  (a) Leicestershire and  (b) the East Midlands;
	(2)  how many NHS dentists there are per head of population in  (a) London and  (b) the South East.

Rosie Winterton: The information is shown in the following tables.
	
		
			  Numbers of dentists on open national health service contracts per 100,000 population in England, East Midlands Strategic Health Authority (SHA) and the specified primary care trusts (PCTs) as at 30 September 2006 
			   Dentists per 100,000 population 
			 England 40.22 
			   
			 East Midlands SHA 36.62 
			 Charnwood and North West Leicestershire PCT 44.07 
			 Eastern Leicester PCT 55.54 
			 Hinckley and Bosworth PCT 30.61 
			 Leicester City West PCT 51.67 
			 Melton, Rutland and Harborough PCT 43.34 
			 South Leicestershire PCT 32.83 
			  Notes: 1. England and SHA population data have been estimated using Office for National Statistics 2005 mid-year population estimates based on the 2001 census. PCT data have been estimated using 2004 mid-year population estimates as these are the latest available at this level. 2. Dentists will be counted more than once if they have contracts in more than one PCT or SHA. The England figure excludes duplication.  Sources: The Information Centre for health and social care NHS Business Services Authority (BSA) 
		
	
	
		
			  Numbers of dentists on open NHS contracts per 100,000 population in England, London and the South East Coast Strategic Health Authorities (SHAs) as at 30 September 2006 
			   Dentists per 100,000 population 
			 England 40.22 
			 London SHA 48.13 
			 South East Coast SHA 48.06 
			  Notes: 1. Population data have been estimated using Office for National Statistics 2005 mid-year population estimates based on the 2001 census. 2. Dentists will be counted more than once if they have contracts in more than one SHA. The England figure excludes duplication.  Sources: The Information Centre for health and social care NHS Business Services Authority (BSA)

Dentistry

Sandra Gidley: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many calls NHS Direct has received about dental problems  (a) during normal surgery hours and  (b) out of hours in each month since April 2005.

Andy Burnham: The information is in the table.
	
		
			  Number of telephone calls received by NHS Direct that resulted in a dental disposition from April 2005 to November 2006 
			  Month ( 1) Total ( 2) In-hours ( 2) Out-of-hours 
			  2005
			 April 20,029 8,771 11,258 
			 May 24,333 11,160 13,173 
			 June 22,278 10,422 11,856 
			 July 23,750 9,916 13,834 
			 August 24,309 11,386 12,923 
			 September 23,198 10,562 12,636 
			 October 23,355 10,056 13,299 
			 November 23,070 10,841 12,229 
			 December 24,935 12,482 12,453 
			  2006
			 January 24,749 10,954 13,795 
			 February 22,856 10,622 12,234 
			 March 28,964 14,290 14,674 
			 April 35,579 12,717 22,862 
			 May 35,347 12,017 23,330 
			 June 30,680 13,353 17,327 
			 July 32,003 12,564 19,439 
			 August 41,696 17,590 24,106 
			 September 35,747 15,594 20,153 
			 October 33,722 15,126 18,596 
			 November 31,185 14,168 17,017 
			 (1 )Number of calls recorded by NHS Direct that resulted in a dental disposition. This does not include health information calls regarding the location of dental services, dental charges etc. (2 )Out of hours is classed as all day Saturday and Sunday, during bank holidays and on weekdays after 18:30 in the evening and before 08:00 in the morning. Other times are classed as in-hours.  Source:  NHS Direct, national operations centre

Health Services: West Lancashire

Rosie Cooper: To ask the Secretary of State for Health which  (a) hospitals,  (b) primary care trusts and  (c) foundation trusts in West Lancashire are in budget deficit.

Rosie Winterton: Information on individual hospitals is not collected centrally. The national health service organisations in west Lancashire currently forecasting a deficit are listed in the following table.
	
		
			   £000 
			  NHS organisation  2006-07 month 6 forecast outturn (deficit) 
			 Southport and Ormskirk Hospital NHS Trust 5,600 
			 University Hospitals of Morecambe Bay NHS Trust 6,357 
			  Source: Department of Health quarter two NHS financial report 2006-07

Waiting Times

Jamie Reed: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what recent estimate she has made of the  (a) waiting times for treatment by and  (b) capacity of the departments of the (i) orthopaedics, (ii) rheumatology, (iii) ear, nose and throat, (iv) general surgery, (v) urology and (vi) gynaecology departments of (A) West Cumberland hospital and (B) Cumberland infirmary; and if she will make a statement.

Andy Burnham: Local primary care trusts are responsible for ensuring that health services are provided to meet the needs of their local population. The information requested on waiting times at North Cumbria Acute Hospitals National Health Service Trust is shown in the following tables.
	
		
			  Provider based inpatient waiting times for North Cumbria Acute NHS Trust, September 2006 
			 Number waiting, individual timebands (weeks) 
			  Speciality  Total waiting list  Median wait (weeks)  Less than 1  1 to <2  2 to <3  3 to <4  4 to <5  5 to <6  6 to <7 
			 General surgery 1,094 7.2 99 10 9 76 66 62 69 51 
			 Urology 207 6.2 22 19 18 22 13 7 13 
			 Trauma and orthopaedics 1,439 9.7 48 68 90 74 57 90 78 
			 Ear, nose and throat 380 7.7 5 31 30 34 20 20 34 
			 Rheumatology 0 n/a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			 Gynaecology 362 9.0 30 30 31 14 20 16 14 
		
	
	
		
			 Number waiting, individual timebands (weeks) 
			  Speciality  Total waiting list  Median wait (weeks)  7 to <8  8 to <9  9 to <10  10 to <11  11 to <12  12 to <13 
			 General surgery 1,094 7.2 72 53 48 37 34 40 
			 Urology 207 6.2 15 7 17 12 8 7 
			 Trauma and orthopaedics 1,439 9.7 10 1 64 74 59 66 64 
			 Ear, nose and throat 380 7.7 23 10 13 8 20 7 
			 Rheumatology 0 n/a 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			 Gynaecology 362 9.0 8 19 10 32 17 12 
		
	
	
		
			 Number waiting, individual timebands (weeks) 
			  Speciality  Total waiting list  Median wait (weeks)  13 to <14  14 to <15  15 to <16  16 to <17  17 to <18  18 to <19  19 to <20 
			 General surgery 1,094 7.2 39 43 24 34 15 29 19 
			 Urology 207 6.2 5 9 4 1 2 2 0 
			 Trauma and orthopaedics 1,439 9.7 57 66 53 62 29 51 38 
			 Ear, nose and throat 380 7.7 27 10 15 18 7 11 15 
			 Rheumatology 0 n/a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			 Gynaecology 362 9.0 7 18 6 12 9 10 11 
		
	
	
		
			 Number waiting, individual timebands (weeks) 
			  Speciality  Total waiting list  Median wait (weeks)  20 to <21  21 to <22  22 to <23  23 to <24  24 to <25  25 to <26  26+ 
			 General surgery 1,094 7.2 10 15 23 14 7 6 0 
			 Urology 207 6.2 1 0 2 1 0 0 0 
			 Trauma and orthopaedics 1,439 9.7 47 43 30 17 7 6 0 
			 Ear, nose and throat 380 7.7 5 8 5 4 0 0 0 
			 Rheumatology 0 n/a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			 Gynaecology 362 9.0 13 13 5 1 2 2 0 
		
	
	
		
			  Provider based outpatient waiting times for North Cumbria Acute NHS Trust, September 2006 
			 Number waiting, individual timebands (weeks) 
			  Speciality  Total waiting list  Median wait (weeks)  Less than 1  1 to <2  2 to <3  3 to <4  4 to <5  5 to <6  6 to <7 
			 General surgery 655 3.1 124 120 78 69 65 60 42 
			 Urology 255 3.8 32 33 31 38 35 21 22 
			 Trauma and orthopaedics 1,152 4.4 129 125 157 134 82 87 75 
			 Ear, nose and throat 305 2.1 80 68 54 31 12 12 9 
			 Rheumatology 109 5.3 13 12 14 9 6 4 7 
			 Gynaecology 476 3.1 83 87 65 44 35 32 29 
		
	
	
		
			 Number waiting, individual timebands (weeks) 
			  Speciality  Total waiting list  Median wait (weeks)  7 to <8  8 to <9  9 to <10  10 to <11  11 to <12  12 to <13  13+ 
			 General surgery 655 3.1 33 28 12 17 7 0 0 
			 Urology 255 3.8 18 18 5 0 2 0 0 
			 Trauma and orthopaedics 1,152 4.4 91 77 59 66 42 28 0 
			 Ear, nose and throat 305 2.1 10 10 6 6 5 2 0 
			 Rheumatology 109 5.3 12 10 10 8 4 0 0 
			 Gynaecology 476 3.1 36 21 26 13 5 0 0 
			  Source: Department of Health, KH07 and QM08